Parlez~me~'n~Tory

Rightly wry, satirically right

Today Dr Liam Fox MP has written to Sir John Chilcott requesting that Gordon Brown be recalled to clarify his evidence.

Dear Sir John,

Since Gordon Brown’s session last Friday (5 March 2010) two former Chiefs of the Defence Staff (Admiral Lord Boyce and General Lord Guthrie) and a former Chief of the General Staff ( General Sir Richard Dannatt), all highly respected men of great integrity, have made public statements completely contrary to, and directly challenging, what Gordon Brown said during his session regarding resourcing and equipping our Armed Forces.

‘There is a strong case for you to recall Gordon Brown for further testimony in front of your inquiry after the upcoming General Election.

‘I fully understand why you do not want your inquiry to be involved with party politics but I do think that it is important to get the truth in this matter even if this cannot happen until after the election.

Yours Sincerely
Dr Liam Fox MP
Shadow Secretary of State for Defence

The case for seeking this clarification?

Lord Guthrie

‘The military wanted to do many things but because of his attitude they were unable to fund properly the Strategic Defence Review (1998) which the Cabinet had approved, especially at a time when other departments were being showered with money.

The Ministry of Defence received the bare minimum from the chancellor, who wanted to give the military as little as he could get away with. The increases that we had in budget were small and did not take into account the above-inflation cost rises of defence….He ‘cannot get away with saying, “I gave them everything they asked for.” That is simply disingenuous’ (The Daily Telegraph, 6 March 2010).

Lord Boyce

‘He’s dissembling, he’s being disingenuous. It’s just not the case that the Ministry of Defence was given everything it needed. There may have been a 1.5 per cent increase in the defence budget but the MoD was starved of funds’ (The Times, 6 March 2010).

General Dannatt

‘In front of Chilcot, he did not address the issue of the underlying underfunding of defence that has been endemic since the Strategic Defence Review of 1997/98.

Implementation of that otherwise excellent Review was hobbled from the start by the Treasury under Gordon Brown not only not fully funding the outcome of the Review, but imposing a three per cent year on year efficiency savings target. To that deficient baseline needs to be added the reopening of the MoD’s budget in 2003, a re-examination of the rules and the effective removal of a £1 billion year on year – what Sir Kevin Tebbit referred to as “guillotining” of the defence budget… Furthermore, despite the Government increasing the headline figure of the defence budget on an annual basis, the uplift to match general inflation was below that of defence inflation, which habitually runs at several percentage points higher.

So the net effect over recent years has been that the real value – the purchasing power – of the defence budget has decreased every year, and the pressure on the MoD and the Armed Forces has increased’ …no amount of rewriting history can compensate for the years when he neither understood defence properly nor was persuaded to pay for it fully’ (The Sunday Telegraph, 7 March 2010).

Seem pretty clear to me!

The Prime Minister would have you believe we are in Afghanistan for the safety of Britain’s streets. We are not.

This video is worthy of your attention.

Guardsman Janes died in Helmand province in October serving his country.

This week his mother (Jacqui) received a personal letter of acknowledgement from the Prime Minister for his part in protecting the streets of Britain.

Describing the content and the state of the letter she said it was

[a] hastily scrawled insult

Further stating

[the letter was] scrawled so quickly I could hardly even read it [and] some of the words were half-finished

As if this wasn’t insult enough Gordon Brown even spelt Guardsman Janes name incorrectly!

That’s as disrespectful as you can get Gordon, you should be very ashamed of yourself.

A Downing St source said

[PM] took a great deal of time writing to bereaved relatives

One can only assume then that there are far too many families of far too many murdered Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen for the Prime Minister of Great Britain to keep on top of.

If that’s the case Gordon, pull our troops out and while you’re at it stand down and let someone with some basic human respect and competence do the job!

Peter Hammond, father of Trooper Joshua Hammond who died in Afghanistan alongside Colonel Rupert Thorneloe has called on Gordon Brown to resign.

In his statement he said

Brown’s either a liar or hasn’t a clue about what’s going on. He should do the right thing and quit

It was revealed within the past few days that Colonel Thorneloe had previously (less than a month before his death) warned about the shortage of helicopters available and in service.

In a briefing for his superior officers he made clear his concerns that British troops would die because they were being forced to travel by road instead of air, effectively making them sitting ducks for the Taliban.

Prior to their death by roadside bomb Colonel Thorneloe, 39, described in June that helicopter operations in the war zone not fit for purpose. Further claiming that he had access to virtually no helicopters that would facilitate him moving up to 800 troops by air.

Exactly 3 weeks after the bomb that killed Colonel Thorneloe and Trooper Hammond the Prime Minister told Parliament

It is completely wrong to say that the loss of lives has been caused by the absence of helicopters

Unsurprisingly Armed Forces Minister Bill Rammell said he did not believe any UK troops had lost their lives in Afghanistan due to a lack of helicopters.

It is the role of the Armed Forces Minister to be briefed by senior military figures and act on that advice weighing up time, cost and performance. Clearly Bill Rammell is being briefed as to the grave consequences of the savage Defence cuts but failing to correctly apply the formula for preservation of life and application of common sense.

Whilst one man clings on to his job because he is so arrogant in his misguided beliefs more innocent members of HM Forces will continue to die in vain.

Gordon, listen to Peter Hammond, do the right thing and resign, now!

Following quite possibly the worst day for the MOD (XV230 / TA) for many a year it seems that the Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth is increasingly isolated in his ivory tower, so much so that even the Prime Minister has sought to distance himself blaming Ainsworth for the TA training cut fiasco.

Taxi for the Defence Secretary?

The Defence Secretary had sought to get the TA cut under the barrier without too much fuss but had forgotten to inform his boss that such choices were in the offing, if he did inform the PM then somebody is not telling the truth. This became evident when a Downing Street spokesman claimed

The Prime Minister is not going to be aware of every single proposal in every single department. Clearly the TA is one that has been of interest to people both inside and outside Parliament

Quite what the PM has in mind for the Defence Secretary will become clear within the next few days but Bob who’s clearly never been comfortable in the role (and more importantly never been up to the challenge) will never again hold such a powerful role in the Government or even in the official Opposition.

What you don’t do when your leader is as weak and desperate as Gordon Brown currently is is to sideline him in your decision making process unless you have delusions of grandeur or unless you are totally inept and not fit for purpose.

I don’t think Bob Ainsworth MP has any desires to be leadership material so that just leaves…

Time: 15:47hrs
Date: 2nd September 2006
Location: Kandahar airspace (Afghanistan)
Last known action: Air-to-Air Refuelling

Immediately following a routine air-to-air refuelling (15:30hrs) XV230 a Nimrod MR2 from 120Sqn RAF Kinloss suffered a fire within the Bomb bay (15:41hrs) minutes later a second fire spread throughout the fuselage (15:46hrs) before XV230 exploded (15:47hrs) immediately killing all 12 crew and 2 passengers:

May they be at peace with their Creator

Flight Lieutenant Allan James Squires, 39, from Clatterbridge (Pilot and Captain)

Flight Lieutenant Steven Johnson, 38, from Collingham, Notts. (Weapon System Officer (Navigator))

Flight Lieutenant Gareth Rodney Nicholas, 40, from Redruth, Cornwall (Weapons Systems Officer (Air Electronics Officer))

Flight Lieutenant Steven Swarbrick, 28, from Liverpool (Pilot)

Flight Lieutenant Leigh Anthony Mitchelmore, 28, from Bournemouth (Weapon System Officer (Navigator))

Flight Sergeant Adrian Davies, 49, from Amersham, Bucks. (Air Engineer)

Flight Sergeant Gary Wayne Andrews, 48, from Tankerton, Kent (Weapon System Operator)

Flight Sergeant Gerard Martin Bell, 48, from Ely, Cambs. (Weapon System Operator)

Flight Sergeant Stephen Beattie, 42, from Dundee (Weapons Systems Operator)

Sergeant Gary Paul Quilliam, 42, from Manchester (Weapons Systems Operator)

Sergeant Benjamin James Knight, 25, from Bridgewater (Weapons Systems Operator)

Sergeant John Joseph Langton, 29, from Liverpool (Weapons Systems Operator)

Marine Joseph David Windall, aged 22, Royal Marines

Corporal Oliver Simon Dicketts, 27, Parachute Regiment

Why am I choosing to write this now?

Today, finally, the results of an independent review into the tragedy carried out by Charles Haddon-Cave QC will be published.

We already know that following an inquest in 2008, a coroner ruled that a serious design flaw in the ageing aircraft meant the entire Nimrod fleet was unsafe to fly and it never had been airworthy [causes of the accident listed at foot of post]

Why am I overly concerned? Because this time it’s personal!

When you read the list of names above that is probably all it is to you, a list.

To me it is a walk down memory lane.

I can count at least 3 on the list that I call friends.

I can count 12 on the list who would come into my office on a daily basis to collect certain equipment to allow them to do their job.

I can count 5 on the list who I have served overseas with on Operations. Furthermore, I have flown in XV230 on a number of occasions courtesy of 120Sqn.

Every name on the list was and in my opinion still is a professional. Doing the job they chose, the job they loved and I can assure you they all had a great time doing what they loved.

The crew knew the state of the aircraft, the RAF knew the state of the Nimrod fleet, we all knew but it was still damned good at its job so it kept on doing it.

I am proud to say I served the Nimrod fleet on my penultimate tour within the RAF towards the end of 24 years service and it was one of the best times I had.

You can be assured that I shall be reading the findings this afternoon with a little more interest than most and hoping that it goes someway to comforting the families and loved ones of my friends and colleagues.

RIP.

CAUSES:
As the Board was unable to investigate XV230’s wreckage at the crash site and it proved impossible to recover more than a few small components from the aircraft, the Board has been unable to determine positively the source or cause of the fire which led to the loss of XV230 and its crew. Nonetheless, through investigation of the limited data available, the Board was able to deduce the most probable location of the fire, a number of probable causes of that event and factors which possibly contributed to it:
a. The escape of fuel during AAR, occasioned by an overflow from No 1 tank, or a leak from the fuel system (fuel coupling or pipe), led to an accumulation of fuel within the No 7 tank dry bay. Although of a lower probability, the fuel leak could have been caused by a hot air leak damaging fuel system seals.
b. The ignition of that fuel following contact with an exposed element of the aircraft’s crossfeed/ SCP pipe work.
CONTRIBUTORY FACTORS:
a. The age of the Nimrod MR2’s non-structural system components.
b. Nimrod MR2 maintenance policy in relation to fuel and hot air systems.
c. The lack of a fire detection and suppression system within the No 7 tank dry bay.
d. The fact that hazard analysis did not correctly categorize the potential threat to the aircraft caused by the collocation of fuel and hot air system components within the No 7 tank dry bay.
e. The formal incorporation of AAR capability within the Nimrod did not identify the full implications of successive changes to the fuel system and associated procedures.
AGGRAVATING FACTOR:
a. The loss of flying controls through fire damage to the hydraulic systems or cables and pulleys.

If I need to speak this video is not doing its job

Both the PLP and the Conservative Party have committed to a full Strategic Defence Review after the General Election. Sounds fair enough.

However, given that these reviews come around every 7 years or so in one form or another they should always be completely independent.

The problem is though, the PLP is in danger of briefing out certain parameters before any review is conducted or even sourced.

The Royal Navy has an order in place for 2 65,000 ton Aircraft Carriers (Queen Elizabeth and the Prince of Wales) that will carry up to 40 Joint Strike Fighters (JSF) and have been billed as the biggest and most powerful warships ever constructed for the Royal Navy.

It’s just that it isn’t likely to happen. It is too late for the RN to pull out of the contract due to financial penalties so the Government are likely to propose that the Prince of Wales be downgraded to a commando ship that would carry only helicopters and troops.

If this act of sabotage comes to pass this once great sea-faring nation will be forced to ‘borrow’ an Aircraft Carrier from the French! This has already been addressed by French president Nicolas Sarkozy when he suggested to Gordon Brown that both countries ‘co-ordinate’ carrier building programmes.

Dr Liam Fox MP the Shadow Secretary of State for Defence went on record as saying

any decision to axe a carrier before the review would be absolutely unacceptable and typical of the Government’s chaotic, inconsistent and incompetent defence procurement policy.

He further stated

The Government is saying it is fully committed-to the carriers while at the same time forcing them to be cut…it is confusing for the Navy, it is confusing for industry and it is completely inconsistent with the whole concept of running an independent defence review.

An MOD spokesman stated that Bob Ainsworth MP ‘remained 100% committed’ to the Aircraft Carriers.

Why is the MOD briefing out for the Defence Secretary? Is there something he is not telling us?

I fear for our Armed Forces, Civil Servants and Public Services in the coming months as the Government does what it can to cling to power whilst using all and sundry as their pawns resulting in the Conservative Government post General Election having their hands tied with terrible financial restriction as Darling and Brown attempt to spend every last penny this country has to its name.

As the title suggests, it is logical to conclude that a Defence Review should be just that, a review undertaken without prejudice and a series of findings produced for which to act upon, NOT the other way around.