UK Eyes Canadian's Reduction Plan

[captloadie]

It looks like the UK may use Canada's slash and burn policy of the 90's to implement reductions.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/08/george-osborne-canada-cuts-model

and

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/now-its-osbornes-turn-to-join-europes-axemen-1994089.html

 

[Edward Campbell]

One of the problems with the Chrétien/Martin model is that it is harder to “download” in the UK. Despite parliaments in Scotland and Ulster, the UK is, really, a unitary state and most of the really high cost services are provided by London.

Ottawa balanced its budgets, in the ‘90s, by reneging on its social programme and medicare co-payment agreements with Alberta, British Columbia and, above all, Ontario. The fact was that while there were some major cuts in federal programmes, especially in defence, few were actually ‘felt’ by most Canadians because the provinces kept providing services about which most Canadians really care – usually by cutting back on e.g. roads, education and transfers to cities which, in turn, cut back on e.g. sewer maintenance and garbage collection or raised property taxes.

 

[jollyjacktar]

I'm sure Cameron could rape and pillage the pension fund of his forces to balance the books just like Uncle Jean did. 

 

[Tank Troll]

Stop buying the Army, Navy and Air Force new equipment, and parts. Freeze their pay, don't promote or post any one. Sell of the PMQ's to private companies to run. Close a whole bunch of Bases in your opponents riding's, and move them to your parties riding's. Don't let them accumulate leave, and last but not least, cut back on as many amenities as possible. That is how you save money the Canadian Liberal way

 

[tomahawk6]

Another way would be to privatize the NHS.

 

[TimBit]

Another way would be to privatize the NHS.

Not even remotely in the books, from what I hear.

 

[Pusser]

I'm sure Cameron could rape and pillage the pension fund of his forces to balance the books just like Uncle Jean did. 

Upon what do you base that statement?  I'm no defender of Jean Chretien or the Liberal Party, but your assertion is patently false.  The Canadian Forces Superannuation Act (our pension) is as stong as it's ever been.  Our pension is a defined benefit plan, defined by legislation.  This is as good as it gets.  The so-called "pension fund" is an accounting tool and nothing more.  The balance of the fund has no effect whatsoever on our benefits.  The Government could empty it tomorrow and it would not change what we receive in our pension cheques.  There was no raping or pillaging.

 

[Edward Campbell]

I'm with Pusser. Defence spending, broadly, was cut back farther than almost any other 'envelope', save, perhaps symphony orchestras and ballet theatres, but our (I was serving then) pay and benefits were not badly handled. We, our colleagues - in the CF and in the civil service - were cut, but, as often as not with a nice 'package' and our pension rights were properly protected.

Re: the UK NHS. It isn't the big problem; it is already much more private than is Canada's medicare system. But the whole social safety net in the UK is poorly administered by a combination of the central and local governments. Big cuts can come by either wholesale centralizing, getting the county councils out of the social programme business, or by equally wholesale decentralizing, letting the local yokels do it all. In either case I have read (somewhere and recently) that something like 40% of current administrative, especially management, staff could be, should be and maybe even will be chopped. The powerful public service unions will scream bloody murder.

 

[GAP]

Our new immigration policy might be put to a real test, if, as is proposed, we focus on immigrants from "safe" countries.....Great Britian is definitely a safe country, but if they are going to blindside the social network structure there, I would give you 3 guesses ( and the first 4 don't count) where a bunch of "citizens" are going to be immigrating to....

 

[Tank Troll]

I'm with Pusser. Defence spending, broadly, was cut back farther than almost any other 'envelope', save, perhaps symphony orchestras and ballet theatres, but our (I was serving then) pay and benefits were not badly handled.

I'm sorry but, WTF??? Our pay incentives stopped short in 94, what ever incentive you were at was it. Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen were standing in line at food banks. Service flights were cut in 96-97. PMQ prices rose to stupid levels in 98 if you lived in any of the big cities. Base hospitals were closed and you had to go to civi ones after hours.  If that is not being handled badly then I don't know what is.

 

[Pusser]

I'm sorry but, WTF??? Our pay incentives stopped short in 94, what ever incentive you were at was it. Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen were standing in line at food banks. Service flights were cut in 96-97. PMQ prices rose to stupid levels in 98 if you lived in any of the big cities. Base hospitals were closed and you had to go to civi ones after hours.  If that is not being handled badly then I don't know what is.

Yes, our pay incentives were stopped short, but that was at the same time that Provincial Governments and the private sector were cutting pay.  Furthermore, the Provincial Governments were applying considerable pressure on the Federal Government to do the same.  All things considered, we didn't fare too badly.

Yes, there were servicemen and women standing in line at food banks.  However, further investigation indicated that there were more things at issue than just our basic pay.  Furthermore, the bigger problems were identified and rectified and we all enjoyed a considerable jump in pay at the end.

Yes, service flights were cut out, because the CF's Boeing 707s wore out and the charter flights that replaced them were not being used as intended.  It's also worth noting that service flights were removed from the compensation and benefits package around 1970.

Yes, PMQ rates rose - at the same rate or in order to bring them up to the same rate as all other rental rates in their respective communities.  The principle is that PMQs are not subsidized housing and their availability is not part of our pay and compensation package; therefore, members must pay market rates to live there.  This is a question of fairness.  Why should people living in PMQs get better rents than those who don't (or can't)?

Yes, base hospitals were closed because they were under-utilized and outdated.  Replacing them was not cost-effective.  Overall health care has not been effected.  We've just had to adapt to different ways of doing things.  We still get to go to the front of the line in public system, so it's not all bad.

Yes, we went through some hard times, but overall, we came out of it relatively unscathed and in a far better position than many civilians.  We don't have to heap praise on the Government, but we don't have to admonish it (on this account) either.  There are an awful lot of people who have worked and are working a lot harder than we do (getting shot at aside), but who enjoy a lesser standard of living.

 

[Tank Troll]

Yes, our pay incentives were stopped short, but that was at the same time that Provincial Governments and the private sector were cutting pay.  Furthermore, the Provincial Governments were applying considerable pressure on the Federal Government to do the same.  All things considered, we didn't fare too badly.

Not the Province I was in. A school Janitor made more money than I did. Plus he got over time for working the weekends. Got leave  in the summer, and rarely got shot at. 

Yes, there were servicemen and women standing in line at food banks.  However, further investigation indicated that there were more things at issue than just our basic pay.  Furthermore, the bigger problems were identified and rectified and we all enjoyed a considerable jump in pay at the end.

Such as......................what having to pay to high a rent in PMQ's. Wife not able to work because of high cost of child care.. cost of living higher than base salary.

Yes, service flights were cut out, because the CF's Boeing 707s wore out and the charter flights that replaced them were not being used as intended.  It's also worth noting that service flights were removed from the compensation and benefits package around 1970.

But we had access to them based on points and such. You could fly from Lahr to Heathrow for 5 DM in 92 or back to Canada.

Yes, PMQ rates rose - at the same rate or in order to bring them up to the same rate as all other rental rates in their respective communities.  The principle is that PMQs are not subsidized housing and their availability is not part of our pay and compensation package; therefore, members must pay market rates to live there.  This is a question of fairness.  Why should people living in PMQs get better rents than those who don't (or can't)?

Which was done by the civilian company that bought them and used that as an excuse to raise our rent. This was brought up at every town hall meeting that was held " I unlike civilians don't get to pick where I live I'm told. I'm payed the same no matter where I live. Why does some one that lives in Gagetown only pay 250.00 a month for the same PMQ that I live in and we are the same rank,and I have to pay 500.00." The cost of living is higher where I was posted, and so is the basic wage so civies that live there already can afford the housing. Hence the Housing subsidy that we now get.

Yes, base hospitals were closed because they were under-utilized and outdated.  Replacing them was not cost-effective.  Overall health care has not been effected.  We've just had to adapt to different ways of doing things.  We still get to go to the front of the line in public system, so it's not all bad.

I had to wait 1 week in 91 for a knee scope from the Canadian forces hospital. I waited 6 months in 97 for the same thing from the Civi one and got bump back because Doug Weight of the Oilers need it more than me. The reason was he is a professional I'm not.

Yes, we went through some hard times, but overall, we came out of it relatively unscathed and in a far better position than many civilians.  We don't have to heap praise on the Government, but we don't have to admonish it (on this account) either.  There are an awful lot of people who have worked and are working a lot harder than we do (getting shot at aside), but who enjoy a lesser standard of living.

The Dark days of the 90 damn near kill our Armed forces and some skills have been lost for ever and others are taking to long to regain. I blame this on the Government cuts and higher ups being yes men to them. If you call this relatively unscathed I'm worried.

 

[Edward Campbell]

...
The Dark days of the 90 damn near kill our Armed forces and some skills have been lost for ever and others are taking to long to regain. I blame this on the Government cuts and higher ups being yes men to them. If you call this relatively unscathed I'm worried.

I hate to say this, but the dark days of 90s were a damned site brighter and sunnier than the even darker days of the '70s and '80s. The trials and tribulations of the 90s were hard, but they were relatively less damaging to individuals and, more importantly, to the organization that the mindless slashing and burning of the '70s and the Chinese water torture or death by a thousand cuts routines of the '80s both of which hurt people and cut meat, muscle and even bone out of the CF body.

 

[Tank Troll]

I hate to say this, but the dark days of 90s were a damned site brighter and sunnier than the even darker days of the '70s and '80s. The trials and tribulations of the 90s were hard, but they were relatively less damaging to individuals and, more importantly, to the organization that the mindless slashing and burning of the '70s and the Chinese water torture or death by a thousand cuts routines of the '80s both of which hurt people and cut meat, muscle and even bone out of the CF body.

The 70s were a result in the down sizing and unification (and that has been beat to death in another thread) but at least we still were operating with full regiments We got new Tanks and Armour vehicles to train with and there was still lots of money for exercises. In the 80's Moral was still good, courses,  promotion and posting were still on track, and we got our pay raises every year. Our army was trained well and we knew our jobs. Now we are getting soldiers with very few years in an not that much experience, rushed into postions of leadership. They don't have time to learn their job in the lower ranks. This is directly attributed to the down sizing of the 90s. Hardly any of the guys that got in stayed passed their second BE. They either got fed up with the BS or found a better job in civi land, and it created this big gap in the rank structure of the Army. They are so desperate now that they are offering Cpl IPS and keeping them in till 55

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Now we are getting soldiers with very few years in an not that much experience, rushed into postions of leadership. They don't have time to learn their job in the lower ranks. This is directly attributed to the down sizing of the 90s.

Unless, of course, you count sustained combat as "experience". 

The Army has changed.  War has a way of doing that.

 

[aesop081]

Which was done by the civilian company that bought them and used that as an excuse to raise our rent. This was brought up at every town hall meeting that was held " I unlike civilians don't get to pick where I live I'm told. I'm payed the same no matter where I live. Why does some one that lives in Gagetown only pay 250.00 a month for the same PMQ that I live in and we are the same rank,and I have to pay 500.00." The cost of living is higher where I was posted, and so is the basic wage so civies that live there already can afford the housing. Hence the Housing subsidy that we now get.

CFHA did not buy the PMQ. CFHA does not own the PMQs.

 

[Tank Troll]

Unless, of course, you count sustained combat as "experience". 

The Army has changed.  War has a way of doing that.

Oh I agree we are getting lots of combat experience, but it is all in a COIN environment, and it depends on what tour you are on as to how much you get.

 

[Tank Troll]

CFHA did not buy the PMQ. CFHA does not own the PMQs.

Well I tell you who owns the place doesn't really matter much when your a young soldier with a family and your rent keeps going up. Plus the fact that all your bosses tell you that CFHA owns them now not the army.

 

[aesop081]

Plus the fact that all your bosses tell you that CFHA owns them now not the army.

Your bosses need an education then........

The Canadian Forces Housing Agency (CFHA) was established as a provisional Special Operating Agency (SOA) of the Department of National Defence (DND) in October 1995. Treasury Board confirmed CFHA’s permanent SOA status in March 2004 with the mandate to operate and maintain the Department’s housing portfolio. This includes the allocation, maintenance, repairs and recapitalization of the housing units, the administration of the shelter charge system and the strategic management of the housing assets on behalf of the Department of National Defence.

I was a brand-new Cpl in Petawawa, living in the PMQs, when CFHA was created. I am no big fan of their management style either. So i did the only sensible thing  after i arrived in Edmonton........i scraped every cent i could and moved out of them.

 

[Pusser]

If you don't like PMQs or feel they are too expensive, no one is forcing you to live there.  We have a variety of very generous benefits to assist with home ownership and PLD has been reasonably successful in allowing people to live on the economy.  Personally, I feel we should get out of the PMQ business altogether.  Notwithstanding the "high" rents collected, they are still a money-loser for the Department.  A telling point a few years ago on one base I was at was that the complaints from the PMQ patch were not so much about size of PMQs or number of bedrooms, but about the lack of parking spaces  -- for the extra cars, ATVs, boats, RVs, etc.  It seems some folks had the priorities a little mixed up.