There may (will) be trouble ahead...

Location : Sheffield Spotter Watch Member : no

Interesting and rather predictable stuff here:-

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6835280.ece

I dunno how many times I have to keep saying to people that the carriers (and therefore the F-35) are on the thinnest of thin ice... I think we should probably discount the comments about Typhoon (think he's clutching at a proverbial straw there) but the Airbus is an interesting point. I guess it's entirely likely that this will be dumped too, but then it would be no loss - we never needed it in the first place when additional C-130's or C-17's can be purchased as necessary.

Of course, these are just the headlines - it's impossible to imagine what else might get the chop next year. Hold on to your hats ladies!
Roll Eyes

Location : Portsmouth , UK Spotter Watch Member : no

Thanks for this , very interesting

Cheers

Will Smith

Subject: Re: There may (will) be trouble ahead... 2009-09-17, 05:08

Thanks for that sheff! Cheers

Jamie

Subject: Re: There may (will) be trouble ahead... 2009-09-17, 05:34

Sheff wrote:: the Airbus is an interesting point. I guess it's entirely likely that this will be dumped too, but then it would be no loss - we never needed it in the first place when additional C-130's or C-17's can be purchased as necessary.

I have found it interesting that each of the consortium members have had many contractual opportunities to walk away from this project but have stuck by it time and time again. The underlying reason being that C130s and C17s don't bring jobs to the their countries.

I'd really be interested to know at what point the savings made in pure monetary terms outweigh the costs transferred in terms of benefits, lost tax revenue, reduced industrial growth/development etc etc.

Location : Sheffield Spotter Watch Member : no

Well this is the fundamental problem with throw-away comments like those made by Mr.Osborne. As he admits, a great deal depends on just how much it costs to walk away from major projects, and whether it's economically better to stick with them. The Airbus saga was (like most Airbus projects) politically-motivated right from the start and it's been a side issue which has kept simmering in the background. In some respects I think the MoD has been quietly hoping that it would collapse, enabling them to go buy more C-130's and C-17's, so I doubt if they'll be heartbroken if the next Government finally abandons it. But the problem is that there might be little appetite to buy any "off the shelf" aircraft to make-up for the lack of Airbuses - and this would leave the RAF in an even worse state than they already are.

The Typhoon business is a new one that hasn't come-up before. I think that by the time the Defence Review actually happens and the cost of cancelling what's left of the programme is taken into account, it will be an easy choice to simply go with the full order as it stands. I would imagine there's some hope that the early Typhoons might be potential re-sale items for export.

The really big, ugly, fundamental issue is the carriers and the F-35. So many people seem to think that the programme is now on a roll and that it's too late to back out. But I disagree. Politicians from both sides are now saying that the carriers are unaffordable, so no matter which party wins the election, the carriers look doomed. I haven't heard so much as one single politician defend the carriers so far. Naturally, as Osborne says, a great deal depends on what it would cost to walk away, but of course there's no reason to suppose that the carriers might not actually be completed but never handed over to the Navy - in the forlorn hope that another country might buy them. Sounds ridiculous but I wouldn't be surprised if this is what actually happens. The basic point is that when both sides of the House seem agreed that the carriers are unaffordable, no government is going to turn-down the opportunity of making a massive cash saving that can be made without any opposition.

As for the F-35, it may well prove to be economically foolish to abandon the planned purchase now, but still I don't think outright cancellation is as unlikely as some people think. The key reason that people used to defend F-35 was because it would supposedly be expensive to purchase another aircraft (or navalise some Typhoons) for the carriers, but if the carriers are abandoned, there's no plausible excuse to defend the F-35 purchase. The RAF doesn't need them - if they did, then it would be cheaper to simply give them the rest of the original planned Typhoon order. The only possible salvation might be the Navy, who will doubtless fight long and hard to reinstate fixed-wing naval air power. My own view is that even the most vociferous Admirals will not be able to sway a near-bankrupt government that cannot see any practical purpose for a sea-borne fleet. Naval power was largely unnecessary for the Gulf Wars and it's equally irrelevant for Afghanistan. Politicians don't think in abstract terms and look at "what if" scenarios for years into the future. They look at recent history and the present day. You can't expect them to see any valid reason for maintaining two huge carriers and a force of F-35's. So unless the Navy fights to the death (and it almost is to the death in this case), then it's a lost cause.

I think the only possible way F-35 might survive depends on how the Defence Review perceives the Harrier force. As we know, there's an appetite to withdraw the whole lot next year, but it's clear that the Review will decide their fate. The temptation must be to abandon F-35 and keep the Harrier for as long as possible - 2025 or longer. The alternative is to get rid of Harriers now and make a short-term saving until F-35 comes along. I'd like to think that the decision will be to abandon F-35 and keep the Harriers as I think that would be the most sensible route given our resources. But I guess there's always the horrible prospect of both programmes being chopped - dumping the Harriers in anticipation of the F-35 and then dumping F-35 too a few months later. Again it sounds absurd but in the present climate it's certainly not impossible.

Strange days indeed!

Location : EGXC Spotter Watch Member : Nope

Oh for God sake. I was planning on supporting Conservatives at the next election because I'm sick of Brown & Co picking away at our Military, but now it would seem that Labour are the lesser of two evils. Well done Osbourne, you've just lost a vote!

Location : Rotherham, South Yorkshire

Surely no-one is surprised by any of this! Whichever government is in power, we will still be in financial difficulties, and still have a long-term (seemingly endless) commitment in Afghanistan. Cuts will have to be made, and it is certain that defence will have to take its share. If anyone thinks that when the Tory Toff is in No.10, he will magically make everything in the defence garden lovely, they are either very young, very naive, or have a very short memory.

Location : United Kingdom Spotter Watch Member : No

Scrap Trident

Location : Rotherham, South Yorkshire

Unknown wrote:: Scrap Trident

Agreed!

Subject: Re: There may (will) be trouble ahead... 2009-09-18, 05:54

Grahame W wrote:

Unknown wrote:: Scrap Trident

Agreed!

Why?

Location : Rotherham, South Yorkshire

madhatters 492 wrote:

Grahame W wrote:

Unknown wrote:: Scrap Trident

Agreed!

Why?

Because we need the money! Trident has no relevance to the war we are fighting in Afghanistan. The resources thus freed up could purchase plenty of helicopters and tactical transports which we do desperately need. Even during the cold war, I felt that Trident was a nonsense. It is even more so now.

Location : Edinburgh Spotter Watch Member : No

Grahame W wrote:

madhatters 492 wrote:

Grahame W wrote:

Unknown wrote:: Scrap Trident

Agreed!

Why?

Because we need the money! Trident has no relevance to the war we are fighting in Afghanistan. The resources thus freed up could purchase plenty of helicopters and tactical transports which we do desperately need. Even during the cold war, I felt that Trident was a nonsense. It is even more so now.

I agree. IIRC much of the fleet that liberated the Falklands was disposed of on its return, in order to pay for our 'Big Boys Toy'

Admin Location : East Midlands Spotter Watch Member : Yes

Albert Einstein once said "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones"

Subject: Re: There may (will) be trouble ahead... 2009-09-18, 08:01

Grahame W wrote:

madhatters 492 wrote:

Grahame W wrote:

Unknown wrote:: Scrap Trident

Agreed!

Why?

Because we need the money! Trident has no relevance to the war we are fighting in Afghanistan. The resources thus freed up could purchase plenty of helicopters and tactical transports which we do desperately need. Even during the cold war, I felt that Trident was a nonsense. It is even more so now.

That would put the Typhoon in the same logic then, what does the Typhoon bring to the war we are fighting in afghanistan ?

why purchase more Typhoons when helicopters and transports are needed.

As for needing the money we all know which socialist party spent money which we never had.

Location : Rotherham, South Yorkshire

what does the Typhoon bring to the war we are fighting in afghanistan

Well, it does have an air-to-ground capability, and so eventually may appear out there, and do some good work. What does Trident bring? ... absolutely nothing!

why purchase more Typhoons when helicopters and transports are needed

Good question! There is a strong argument that we do not need the full quota of Typhoons and the money might be better spent on helicopters, etc. Personally, I am undecided about this.

Location : Sheffield Spotter Watch Member : no

You have to look at Trident as a separate issue though. It's not about defence as such, it's more about political clout. There's no way that a UK government would give up a nuclear capability - once you've got it then you keep it. But there is certainly a question as to how or when Trident is replaced or upgraded and it's already high on the political agenda. Trouble is, it would be foolish to imagine that by saving any money on Trident, the money would be used on other defence programmes - it probably would be that clear-cut!

Location : United Kingdom Spotter Watch Member : No

That is exactly my point, Trident is as Judi Dench said of James Bond in Goldeneye, a relic of the Cold War, my point is that the money you save in the UK Defence Budget from doing away with Trident could and should be put towards Eurofighters, Helicopters and other items of equipment the Army Soldiers and all Forces in the Afghan Desert really need - Simples............

Admin Location : East Midlands Spotter Watch Member : Yes

I've been looking at some data today and thought I might share it with you..... There may (will) be trouble ahead... 294955

The following is the Governments Public expenditure by departmental grouping as departmental expenditure limits (DEL).

Current Prices (£ billion)
	Outturn		Outturn		Outturn		Outturn		Outturn	Estimated Outturn
	2002/03	1	2003/04		2004/05		2005/06		2006/07	2007/08
Total Government Resource DEL2	229.9	r	245.1	r	258.8	r	277.6	r	291.2	313.1
Of which:

Children, Schools and Families2	10.6	r	11.9	r	12.6	r	14.3	r	42.1	44.9
Health	57.1		63.6		69.1		76.4		80.4	89.2
Of which: NHS England	55.4		61.9		66.9		74.2		78.5	87.1

CLG Local Government3	37.4		40.9		43.3		46.2		22.5	22.7
Home Office2	7.3	r	7.9	r	8.0	r	8.3	r	8.3	8.7
Defence4	36.5		31.4		31.3		33.5	r	33.5	36.7
Work and Pensions2	7.0	r	7.8	r	8.0	r	8.0	r	7.9	8.1
Current Prices (£ billion)
	Outturn		Outturn		Outturn		Outturn		Outturn	Estimated Outturn
	2002/03	1	2003/04		2004/05		2005/06		2006/07	2007/08
Total Government Capital DEL2	27.1	r	30.5	r	32.8		35.2	r	38.9	43.9
Of which:

Children, Schools and Families2	2.7	r	3.5	r	4.1	r	4.4	r	4.1	5.5
Health	2.1		2.7		2.7		2.2		3.2	3.6
Of which: NHS England	2.1		2.6		2.6		2.2		3.1	3.3

CLG Local Government3	0.2		0.2		0.3		0.3		0.2	0.1
Home Office2	0.7	r	0.7	r	0.6	r	0.6	r	0.6	0.8
Defence	6.1		6.0		6.7		6.4		7.1	8.1
Work and Pensions	0.3		0.2		0.3		0.4		0.2	0.1
Current Prices (£ billion)
	Outturn		Outturn		Outturn		Outturn		Outturn	Estimated Outturn
	2002/031		2003/04		2004/05		2005/06		2006/07	2007/08
Total Government AME2,5	160.0	r	164.8	r	173.0	r	187.5	r	206.3	221.2
Of which:

Children, Schools and Families2	7.2	r	6.6	r	6.3	r	8.0	r	8.6	10.7
Health	4.7		6.3		6.7		10.1		10.5	14.6
Of which: NHS England	0.1		0.1		0.3		0.8		0.3	0.6

CLG Local Government3	0.2		0.4		0.5		0.5		1.0	0.9
Home Office2	1.7	r	-		-		-		0.3	0.4
Defence6	*		1.0		0.9		0.9		0.6	0.5
Work and Pensions2	99.9	r	103.8	r	110.7	r	115.2	r	119.3	129.6

Total Government DEL (RDEL + CDEL)2,7	256.9	r	275.6	r	291.6	r	312.8	r	330.0	357.1

Total Government AME2,5	160.0	r	164.8	r	173.0	r	187.5	r	206.3	221.2

Total Government Spend (RDEL + CDEL + AME)2,6	416.9	r	440.4	r	464.6	r	500.3	r	536.3	578.2

Admin Location : East Midlands Spotter Watch Member : Yes

Some more data

Inclusive of non-recoverable VAT at Current Prices (£ million)
		Outturn		Outturn		Outturn		Outturn		Outturn

		2003/04		2004/05		2005/06		2006/07		2007/08
Defence Spending		30 861		32 515		33 164		34 045		37 407

Departmental Expenditure Limits		37 174		38 323		39 751		40 654		43 654

Resource DEL		31 266		31 798		32 911		33 457		35 709
of which:
	Expenditure on Personnel	10 435		10 996		11 255		11 204		11 485
	of which: for Armed Forces	7 974		8 047		8 263		8 423		8 649
	for Civilians	2 461		2 948		2 992		2 781		2 836

	Depreciation/Impairments	6 313		5 808		6 587		6 609		6 247
	Cost of Capital	2 770		3 026		3 106		3 242		3 371
	Equipment Support1	3 804		3 623		3 542		3 793		4 272
	Stock Consumption2	1 060		1 079		1 039		1 140		1 071
	Property Management3	1 393		1 509		1 367		1 258		1 523
	Movements4	491		711		729		774		858
	Accommodation & Utilities5	643		581		735		786		750
	Professional Fees6,7	549		565		553		482	r	471
	Fuel8	161		239		369		416		537
	Hospitality & Entertainment	8		6		5		4		4
	PFI Service Charges	*		*		870		1 148		1 276
	IT & Communications	738		678		643		719		655
	Research and Expensed Development	1 011		996		994		988		952
	Rentals Paid Under Operating Leases	214		229		56		138		152
	Fixed Assets Written Off/Written On	26		- 86		- 302		730		870
	Stock Written Off	528		704		759		95		432
	Other Costs9	1 121	r	1 134	r	604	r	- 69	r	783


Capital DEL		5 908		6 525		6 840		7 197		7 945
of which:
	Expenditure on Fixed Asset Categories
	Intangible Assets10	1 665		1 580		1 550		1 744		1 756
	Land and Buildings7	54		388	r	31		45		126
	Single Use Military Equipment7,11	90		435	r	402		404		657
	Plant, Machinery & Vehicles	78		124		64		32		36
	IT & Communications Equipment	183		134		180		206		361
	Assets Under Construction12	3 931		4 335		4 879		5 099		5 450
	Transport13	*		73		13		33		55
	Capital Spares13	581		*		*		*		*
	Capital Loan Repayment	- 28		- 25		- 53		- 8		- 10
	Capital Income14,15	- 646		- 519		- 225		- 358		- 486


AME		1 011		908		890		582		510
of which:
	War Pensions7	1 116		1 110		1 067		1 038	r	1 014
	Other7,16	- 105		- 202		- 177		- 456	r	- 504

Admin Location : East Midlands Spotter Watch Member : Yes

Footnotes of the above

1. Internal and contracted out costs for equipment repair and maintenance.
2. Consumption of armament, medical, dental, veterinary, oil, clothing, and general stores.
3. Estate and facilities management services and costs for buildings' maintenance.
4. Cost of transportation of freight and personnel.
5. Charges include rent, rates, gas, electricity, water and sewerage costs.
6. Fees, such as legal costs, paid to professional organisations.
7. Minor revisions in 2004/05 and 2006/07 caused by rounding.
8. Relates to fuel consumption by military vehicles, ships and aircraft.
9. Other costs can include Grants-in-aid, Exchange rate movements, Provisions, receipts, welfare, medical and legal costs. Research and Expensed
Development, Rentals paid under operating leases and Fixed Asset and Stock written off, that have previously been shown under 'Other Costs', are now
shown separately.
10. Intangible Assets comprise the development costs of major equipment projects and Intellectual Property Rights.
11. SUME are assets which only have a military use, such as tanks and fighter aircrafts. Dual use items i.e. those that also have a civilian use are recorded
under the other categories.
12. Assets Under Construction (AUC) largely consist of major weapons platforms under construction in the Defence Equipment & Support, and a smaller
element of Buildings under construction. Once construction is complete, those platforms will transfer to the relevant Top Level Budget holder as SUME on
their Balance Sheets.
13. From 2004/05 Transport has been recorded as a separate category and Capital Spares has been removed as a category, with the costs previously
recorded here being incorporated into Transport or SUME.
14. Redemption of QinetiQ preference shares refers to the proceeds received from the partial redemption of the redeemable preference shares during
2004/05.
15. Capital income is receipts for the sale of fixed assets.
16. Under Stage 2 of RAB, this category now contains only demand led payments, such as cash release and cost of capital credit on nuclear provisions and
QinetiQ loan repayments.

Admin Location : East Midlands Spotter Watch Member : Yes

This table includes expenditure on Conflict Prevention (RfR2).
		RAB Stage 2
Inclusive of non-recoverable VAT at Current Prices (£ million)
		Outturn		Outturn		Outturn		Outturn		Outturn
		2003/04		2004/05		2005/06		2006/07		2007/08
Departmental Expenditure Limits (DEL)		37 174		38 323		39 751		40 654		43 654

	Request for Resources 1: PROVISION OF DEFENCE CAPABILITY	35 681		37 211		38 484		38 858		40 622

Resource DEL		30 033		30 860		31 855		32 009		33 513
of which:
	Commander-in-Chief Fleet2	3 242		3 569		3 548		2 148		2 185
	General Officer Commanding (Northern Ireland)	649		626		580		389		*
	Commander-in-Chief Land Command3	5 079		5 341		5 632		4 322		6 495
	Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief RAF Strike Command	3 385		3 503		4 043		1 924		*
	Commander-in-Chief Air Command4	*		*		*		*		2 635
	Chief of Joint Operations	524		493		570		391		475
	Chief Defence Logistics5	7 758	r	7 452		7 588	r	12 788		*
	Defence Equipment & Support6	*		*		*		*		16 236
	2nd Sea Lord/Commander-in-Chief Naval Home Command	693		763		778		*		*
	Adjutant General (Personnel and Training Command)5	1 743	r	1 778		1 924		1 576		*
	Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief RAF Personnel and Training Command	995		1 125		904		762		*
	Central5	2 695		3 136	r	2 458		2 172		2 317
	Defence Estates7	*		*		1 056		2 692		2 628
	Defence Procurement Agency5	2 850	r	2 568		2 272		2 321	r	*
	Science Innovation Technology	420		506		502		524		542


Capital DEL		5 648		6 351		6 629		6 849		7 109
of which:
	Commander-in-Chief Fleet2	37		17		7		14		29
	General Officer Commanding (Northern Ireland)	43		28		4		2		*
	Commander-in-Chief Land Command3	21		153		47		75		123
	Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief RAF Strike Command	40		27		10		7		*
	Commander-in-Chief Air Command4	*		*		*		*		13
	Chief of Joint Operations	22		24		19		4		34
	Chief Defence Logistics	1 210		1 121		1 045		1 243		*
	Defence Equipment & Support6	*		*		*		*		6 661
	2nd Sea Lord/Commander-in-Chief Naval Home Command	28		23		11		*		*
	Adjutant General (Personnel and Training Command)	41		26		17		15		*
	Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief RAF Personnel and Training Command	18		24		13		11		*
	Central	- 96		322		- 44		44		41
	Defence Estates7	*		*		274		140		208
	Defence Procurement Agency5	4 284	r	4 586		5 226	r	5 294	r	*
	Science Innovation Technology	*		*		*		*		*

	Request for Resources 2: CONFLICT PREVENTION	1 493		1 112		1 266	r	1 796	r	3 032
	(not broken down by Top Level Budget)
Resource DEL		1 233		938		1 055	r	1 448		2 196
Capital DEL		260		174		211		348		836

Annually Managed Expenditure (AME)		1 011		908		890		582		510

	Request for Resources 1: PROVISION OF DEFENCE CAPABILITY8	- 105		- 202		- 177		- 456	r	-504

	Commander-in-Chief Fleet2	- 2		*		8		*		*
	General Officer Commanding (Northern Ireland)	*		*		*		*		*
	Commander-in-Chief Land Command3	*		*		*		*		*
	Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief RAF Strike Command	*		*		*		*		*
	Commander-in-Chief Air Command4	*		*		*		*		*
	Chief of Joint Operations	5		- 3		7		9		*
	Chief Defence Logistics	- 66		26		3		67		*
	Defence Equipment & Support6	*		*		*		*		169
	2nd Sea Lord/Commander-in-Chief Naval Home Command	*		*		*		*		*
	Adjutant General (Personnel and Training Command)	*		*		*		*		*
	Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief RAF Personnel and Training Command	*		2		*		*		*
	Central	6		2		- 2		*		*
	Defence Estates7	*		*		*		*		-673
	Defence Procurement Agency	- 49		- 228		- 193		- 545		*
	Science Innovation Technology	*		*		*		*		*
	Not Allocated	*		*		*		13		*

	Request for Resources 2: CONFLICT PREVENTION	*		*		*		*		*

	Request for Resources 3: WAR PENSIONS & ALLOWANCES, etc	1 116		1 110		1 067		1 038	r	1 014
Source: MOD Directorate of Performance and Analysis
1. Full TLB definitions are available in the Glossary at the back of this publication.
2. C-in-C Fleet TLB includes the former 2nd Sea Lord/C-in-C Naval Home Command TLB from 2006/07.
3. Land Command includes the former Adjutant General (Personnel and Training Command).
4. Air Command is an amalgamation of 'Air Officer Commanding in Chief RAF Personnel and Training Command' and 'RAF Strike Command'.
5. Revisions within RDEL and CDEL for the years 2003/04 to 2006/07 are caused by the attributions of costs previously classed as 'Not Allocated'. Totals for 2006/07 have been adjusted for consistency to the MOD Annual Report and Accounts.
6. Defence Equipment & Support was created from the amalgamation of the 'Defence Logistic Organisation' and 'Defence Procurement Agency'.
7. The 'Defence Estates' TLB was formed on 1 April 2005 . This was formerly part of 'Central' TLB. There is no historic data for this new TLB.
8. AME for 2003/04 onwards includes accounting charges relating to nuclear decommissioning, loan interest and cost of capital charges for self financing
public corporations. The negative AME figures arise from the cash release from the nuclear decommissioning provision and the cost of capital charge
calculated on a net balance sheet liability (as opposed to net assets).

Admin Location : East Midlands Spotter Watch Member : Yes

This bit is some what juicy

Inclusive of non-recoverable VAT at Current Prices (£ million)
	Outturn	Outturn	Outturn		Outturn		Outturn
	2003/04	2004/05	2005/06	1	2006/07	2	2007/08	3
Total Defence Output Cost	33 415	31 222	33 325		32 911	r	35 209

OBJECTIVE 1: Achieving success in the tasks we undertake	3 481	3 390	3 564		3 711		4 050

Operations	1 233	938	1 040		1 443		2 196
Other Military Tasks	1 659	1 764	1 698		1 525		1 086
Contributing to the Community	360	395	494		397		460
Helping to Build a Safer World	229	293	332		346		309

OBJECTIVE 2: Being ready to respond to the tasks that might arise4	26 777	24 934	26 601		26 292		28 320

Royal Navy	9 990	7 310	7 942		7 037		7 586
Aircraft Carriers	293	347	354		339		377
Frigates & Destroyers	1 709	1 548	1 355		1 619		1 491
Smaller Warships	284	486	413		390		360
Amphibious Ships	339	340	290		339		414
Strategic Sealift	3	38	41		46		34
Fleet Support Ships	348	408	344		366		304
Survey & Other Vessels	157	102	72		94		153
Naval Aircraft	1 393	1 193	1 139		1 083		1 123
Submarines	4 862	2 307	3 393		2 204		2 783
Royal Marines	604	540	540		557		548

Army	8 723	9 252	10 479		10 706		11 261
Field Units	6 372	7 517	8 492		8 822		9 671
Other Units	2 350	1 736	1 987		1 884		1 590

Royal Air Force	7 002	6 825	6 848		6 987		7 573
Combat Aircraft5	4 519	4 577	4 125		3 692		4 193
Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition and Reconnaissance Aircraft (ISTAR)6	350	489	606		613		899
Tankers, Transport and Communications Aircraft	1 040	1 028	1 247		1 211		1 025
Future Capability	339	15	20		44		86
Other Aircraft and RAF Units	753	716	850		1 427		1 371

Centre Grouping	1 063	1 547	1 332		1 562		1 899
Joint and Multinational Operations	148	523	474		425		761
Centrally Managed Military Support	236	289	400		367		606
Maintenance of War Reserve Stocks	679	734	458		770		532

OBJECTIVE 3: Building for the future	3 156	2 899	3 160		2 907		2 838

Research & Expensed Development	1 007	996	1 041		1 026		974
Equipment Programme	2 149	1 903	2 119		1 881		1 865
Source: MOD Annual Report & Accounts
1. The increased Total Defence Output Cost figure for 2005/06 reflects: an increased cost incurred following the change in discount rate, from 3.5% to 2.2%, applied to the Department's provisions for nuclear decommissioning of £1.1 billion; and movements in other operating costs, including staff, impairments, and depreciation as a result of the Quinquennial review of fixed assets of £1.4 billion offset by receipts from the sale of QinetiQ shares.
2. With effect from April 2006, intangible and tangible fixed assets were transferred from Top Level Budgets (TLBs) to Single Balance Sheet Owners (SBSOs). The related operating costs (e.g. depreciation and cost of capital charge) have been apportioned to outputs by the SBSOs using the percentage of costs attributed to the Management Grouping in 2005/06 as a basis for the apportionment. Where Front Line TLBs had previously allocated some asset costs directly to final outputs, the methodology used in 2006/07 has resulted in some variances in costs attributed to final outputs from those reported in 2005/06. Restructuring within RAF Strike Command resulted in a more accurate alignment of costs to outputs.
3. A working group, consisting of all TLBs and the SBSOs, was set up in 2007/08 to review the apportionment methods used. The aim was to improve consistency in the costing of final outputs; some of the variances between 2006/07 and 2007/08 are as a result of changes agreed by the group. The increase in Total Defence Output is as a result of: Operational costs due to continuing commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan £0.75Billion and costs in respect of Typhoon £0.5Billion, Apache helicopters £0.3Billion and increases to provisions in respect of nuclear decommissioning £0.5Billion.
4. The costs of delivering the military capability to meet Objective 2 are analysed among force elements of the front line commands, including joint force units where these have been established, and a small number of centrally managed military support activities. In addition to the direct operating costs of the front line units, they include the attributed costs of logistical and personnel support. In common with all Objectives, these also contain a share of the costs of advising ministers and accountability to Parliament, and apportioned overheads for head office functions and centrally provided services.
5. Combines former titles of Strike/Attack and Offensive Support Aircraft and Defensive and Surveillance Aircraft.
6. Formerly Reconnaissance and Maritime Patrol Aircraft.

Admin Location : East Midlands Spotter Watch Member : Yes

	Tangible Fixed Assets							Current Prices (£ million)
	Land &	Plant &	Transport	IT & Comms	SUME2	AUC3	AUC3	Intangible	Invest-	Total
	Buildings	Machinery		Equipment		SUME	Other	Assets	ments	Assets
Top Level Budget4 Total	19 774	1 753	4 611	1 059	35 767	11 141	3 826	26 692	497	105 120
Commander-in-Chief Fleet⁵	-	1	1	4	-	-	41	-	-	47
General Officer Commanding (Northern Ireland)	-	-	2	-	-	-	-	-	-	2
Commander-in-Chief Land Command	18	-	3	5	4	-	141	-	-	171
Commander-in-Chief Air Command6	-	-	-	1	-	-	31	-	-	32
Chief of Joint Operations	24	3	3	2	-	1	45	9	-	87
Defence Equipment & Support7	46	1 746	4 600	1 045	35 763	11 140	2 374	26 683	-	83 398
Central	-	2	1	2	-	-	82	-	497	583
Defence Estates	19 686	1	1	-	-	-	1 112	-	-	20 800
Source: MOD Directorate of Performance and Analysis
1. Figures provided as at 31 March 2008 are taken from MOD Fixed Assets Register. Figures relate to the net book value of the MOD fixed assets.
The net value of an asset is equal to its original cost (its book value) minus depreciation and amortisation costs.
2. SUME refers to Single Use Military Equipment.
3. AUC refers to Assets Under Construction.
4. The reason for the relatively small amounts in TLBs is due to the Fixed Assets not having been transferred to the single balance sheet holder mainly because the TLBs cannot agree on the asset value or there are other difficulties over the paper work. If the system works well they should reduce to zero.
5. C-in-C Fleet TLB includes the former 2nd Sea Lord/C-in-C Naval Home Command TLB from 2006/07.
6. Air Command is an amalgamation of 'Air Officer Commanding in Chief RAF Personnel and Training Command' and 'RAF Strike Command'.
7. Defence Equipment & Support was created from the amalgamation of the 'Defence Logistic Organisation' and 'Defence Procurement Agency'.

Admin Location : East Midlands Spotter Watch Member : Yes

VAT exclusive at Current Prices (£ million)
SIC(92) Group		1990/91	1995/96	1997/98	1998/99	1999/00	2000/01		2001/02
Total		8 870	10 030	11 200	12 170	11 480	12 060	\|\|	12 760
Solid Fuels	10	10	10	-	-	-	-	\|\|	-
Petroleum Products	23.2	390	290	300	230	240	340	\|\|	370
Gas, Electricity and Water Supply	40-41	250	230	270	260	250	230	\|\|	210

Metals	27,28	*	80	140	180	200	200	\|\|	180
Chemicals	24	*	60	40	50	40	60	\|\|	60

Other Mechanical and Marine Engineering	29.1-29.5	800	240	370	270	220	210	\|\|	220
Weapons & Ammunition	29.6	750	400	750	880	830	790	\|\|	690

Data Processing Equipment	30	280	640	80	180	120	140	\|\|	180

Other Electrical Engineering	31	170	270	180	250	210	190	\|\|	180
Electronics & Precision Instruments	32,33	1 810	1 090	1 320	1 400	950	1 000	\|\|	1 110

Motor Vehicles and Parts	34, 35.2, 35.4, 35.5	320	480	280	390	330	180	\|\|	170
Shipbuilding and Repairing	35.1	780	770	790	1 180	1 090	1 100	\|\|	1 230
Aircraft and Spacecraft	35.3	2 130	2 060	2 360	2 220	2 240	2 390	\|\|	2 540

Food	15	160	120	110	120	120	120	\|\|	140
Textiles, Leather Goods and Clothing	17,18,19	140	110	130	130	140	120	\|\|	120
Office Furniture	36.1	*	70	110	60	60	60	\|\|	70
Stationery	21,22	*	120	30	40	30	40	\|\|	40

Construction	45	*	1 280	1 060	1 070	1 040	1 070	\|\|	1 100

Postage	64.1	*	10	20	20	40	40	\|\|	40
Telecommunications	64.2	*	120	180	290	260	210	\|\|	320

Other Production Industries1	nes3	370	270	900	1 080	1 140	1 440	\|\|	1 520
Other Industries and Services2	nes3	510	1 300	1 770	1 860	1 940	2 140	\|\|	2 280
Source: DASA (Economic Statistics)
1. This category includes expenditure on equipment in other manufacturing industries, as well as the business and administration, education and training and
operational support sectors.
2. This category includes expenditure on services in the business and administration, education and training and operational support sectors. It also includes
expenditure on road and rail transport and freight.
3. Not elsewhere specified.

Admin Location : East Midlands Spotter Watch Member : Yes

Thousands									Percentage
	2002/03	2003/04	3	2004/05	3	2005/06	4	2006/07		2002/03	2003/04	2004/05		2005/06		2006/07
United Kingdom	135	140		135		145	r	135		*100*	*100*	*100*		*100*		*100*

England	118	126	r	123	r	130	r	126		89	89	90	r	91		92

East of England	13	12		10		11		8		10	9	7		8		6
East Midlands	3	3		3		5		4		2	2	2		3		3
London	10	10		13		9		9		8	7	10		6		7
North East	2	3		2		2		3		2	2	1		2		2
North West	14	17		15		15		17		11	12	11		10	r	13
South East	36	36		37		41	r	38		27	26	27		29	r	28
South West	30	35		35		37		37		23	25	26		26		27
West Midlands	6	6		5		5		7		5	4	4		4		5
Yorkshire & Humber	4	4		3		4		4		3	3	2		3		3

Scotland	10	10		9		9		7		8	7	7		6		5
Wales	2	3		2		2		2		2	2	1		1		1
Northern Ireland	2	2		2		2		2		2	1	1		1		1
Source: DASA(Economic Statistics)
1. Using the average UK turnover per full time equivalent may neglect potential differences in regional turnover per head. However, regional turnover per head at the level of SIC used in the employment estimates is not currently available from the ONS: the employment estimates for a number of industries/ products use 3 digit SIC level data, and the ONS only publish (limited) regional data derived from the Annual Business Inquiry (ABI) data at 2 digit level. The impact of using national employment averages is not likely to produce a significantly different output than if regional employment averages were available.
2. Estimates have been provided from 2002-03 onwards to reflect the available expenditure data derived from the MOD adminstrative systems that were introduced with Resource Accounting and Budgeting.
3. The revisions prior to 2005-06 are due to the correction of some very minor rounding anomalies.
4. The revisions to the regional employment numbers for 2005-06 reflect updated information relating to industry turnover from the Office for National Statistics, which only became available after the publication of UKDS 07. This is turn has resulted in very minor adjustments to the percentage breakdowns.