British soldiers reduced to beggary

[Banquo's Ghost]

I probably shouldn't post this so soon after reading it since I will probably have to ban myself, but I am appalled.

I know from acquaintances that things are bad, but what really gets my goat is the sanctimonious from the MoD who seek to deny or deflect the issues. Just as they are constantly evading the faulty/non-existent equipment crisis.

In my day, one got fed all too well. Crikey, pay wasn't brilliant but then one's entire need was taken care of so you never spent much of it.

Pay As You Dine?!

The analysis, described by General Dannatt as "a comprehensive and accurate portrayal of the views and concerns of the Army at large", states: "More and more single-income soldiers in the UK are now close to the UK government definition of poverty." It reveals that "a number of soldiers were not eating properly because they had run out of money by the end of the month". Commanders are attempting to tackle the problem through "Hungry Soldier" schemes, under which destitute soldiers are given loans to enable them to eat.

[rory_20_uk]

Cut social support benefits, increase army salaries.

[InsaneApache]

It's straight out of the Blair/Brown handbook. 'How to fight two foreign wars on the cheap'. An utter disgrace.

The thing is Brown helped cause this when he abolished (read doubled) the tax rate for the poorest in society just to score political points over the Tories.

The one eyed one should hang his head in shame.

[Tribesman]

It's straight out of the Blair/Brown handbook.

Actually it predates nu-labour , everything in that report from army housing medical care and catering all comes from the Tories drive to privatise it all .

[InsaneApache]

That makes it even worse then.

[Tribesman]

That makes it even worse then.

No what would make it worse is if the soldiers were reduced to buggery to pay their way .

[Vladimir]

The Independent? Isn't that where you got the "Israel is teh eval" story from before?

There are more old people who vote more than soldiers; Democracy in action. In the ~70 years since social security was first enabled here the age requirement has only increased once, by two years.

You're also assuming too much and information in the article is poor. Soldiers have always made lousy money but here at least they get free lodging and often free meals. Transportation to work is almost never a problem because someone WILL be found to give you a ride. This "living in poverty" pap doesn't tell you what that means. It most likely means that their annual pay falls below a certain amount on a chart. It also doesn't account for the spending habits of these "many" soldiers (how many?).

It is a shame to see the British armed forces in their current state of neglect but it's a choice the voters have made. Service is still voluntary.

[Banquo's Ghost]

The Independent? Isn't that where you got the "Israel is teh eval" story from before?

The Independent, whilst having a editorial stance which is slightly left of centre, takes great pains to ensure commentators are chosen from all colours of the political spectrum. News reports (like this article) are rarely slanted to a political viewpoint, though often critical of governments. The Israel thread was based on an opinion piece - this thread is based on a news piece. There must be a US paper that takes a similar cross-bench approach?

There are more old people who vote more than soldiers; Democracy in action. In the ~70 years since social security was first enabled here the age requirement has only increased once, by two years.

I think I can see your point, but most older people are very supportive of the military covenant. I doubt if many of them would, given the choice, vote to have soldiers treated in this manner.

You're also assuming too much and information in the article is poor. Soldiers have always made lousy money but here at least they get free lodging and often free meals. Transportation to work is almost never a problem because someone WILL be found to give you a ride. This "living in poverty" pap doesn't tell you what that means. It most likely means that their annual pay falls below a certain amount on a chart. It also doesn't account for the spending habits of these "many" soldiers (how many?).

Since the report has been written for Sir Richard Dannatt, Chief of the General Staff, who described it as: "a comprehensive and accurate portrayal of the views and concerns of the Army at large" - and meshes with concerns I have heard first hand from colleagues still in the Army, that gives it some weight for me. Add in some well respected former commanders, and the conclusions are pretty robust.

As I noted, in my day soldiers were not well-paid, but as you point out, got free lodging and meals. The "living in poverty pap" clearly states that soldiers no longer get those benefits, and this is causing severe problems. Here, let me help:

Commanders are attempting to tackle the problem through "Hungry Soldier" schemes, under which destitute soldiers are given loans to enable them to eat.

The scheme symbolises a change from the tradition of soldiers getting three square meals a day for free. Now hard-up soldiers have to fill out a form which entitles them to a voucher. The cost is deducted from their future wages, adding to the problems of soldiers on low pay.

The controversial Pay as You Dine (PAYD) regime, which requires soldiers not on active duty to pay for their meals, has seen commanding officers inundated with complaints from soldiers unhappy at the quality of food that they get and the amount of paperwork involved.

You certainly are right to be interested in how influential spending patterns are. Soldiers are still part of wider society, and that society is heavily indebted.

It is a shame to see the British armed forces in their current state of neglect but it's a choice the voters have made. Service is still voluntary.

I suppose that you have a point there, assuming that the betrayal of the military covenant was explicit in either manifesto. Service is indeed voluntary, and the point being made is that fewer and fewer people are choosing the service. If HM Government doesn't want to pay properly, then they should be consistent and downsize the Armed Services to the three men and a dog (plus rowboat) we have in Ireland and stop invading/occupying countries at the behest of others.

[Somebody Else]

No what would make it worse is if the soldiers were reduced to buggery to pay their way .

A friend of mine did show me this website once...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Fortunately they were Americans

[Husar]

Right Banquo, and I also think it's weird that lodging and meals aren't free, if you hardly get enough money to pay for these then what's the point in joining the army?

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Right Banquo, and I also think it's weird that lodging and meals aren't free, if you hardly get enough money to pay for these then what's the point in joining the army?

Reading that article, I'm not only deeply disturbed, but hoping that it'll never happen here.

[KukriKhan]

If HM Government doesn't want to pay properly, then they should be consistent and downsize the Armed Services to the three men and a dog (plus rowboat) we have in Ireland...

The argument being a Large Standing Army(tm) vs a small, crouching one.

We still provide 3 squares and a rack per soldier, per day. BUT, in the combat zone, I hear that our private contractors charge $16 per plate of soldier food. Going back for 'seconds' is allowed... at another $16 per, regardless of volume.

[Abokasee]

No what would make it worse is if the soldiers were reduced to buggery to pay their way .

Dam you got there before me

Its appauling that soldiers can't even eat when fighting, the phrase "Eat Lead!" is reversed here shamefully, Germans Soldiers suposedly overweight according to a report some months ago, British ones need to take out a loan for some baked beans!, If you ask me, don't loan the soldiers money, ******* give it to them and ask them to continue.

[Crazed Rabbit]

So, to gain a sense of perspective, how much would be given to a small family on the dole in Britain?

Needless to say, this is a terrible shame.

CR

[Tribesman]

Jesus Banquo , I suppose this illustrates why you are moderatetor material . how on earth can you read Vladamirs crap without flipping into a What are you on about mode ?
Oooooo...its te independant ......I mean follow the links it ain't the O'Reilly independant it is a report by the British army about the British army ..you don't even have to wade through all the pages of what letters mean what to find that out ..its on the first frigging page

There are more old people who vote more than soldiers

Fruitbat territory , I have sat in many pubs in Britain when peope have said to the auld fella .."sure you know you must have done your time you are of that age" the reply that he joined the FCA for a pair of boots does puzzle them somewhat .
The whole bloody set up over there with social security and all that stuff was based on veterans rights , homes fit for heroes and all that bollox .

As I noted, in my day soldiers were not well-paid, but as you point out, got free lodging and meals.

Did you hell , your wages werre set that deductions for bed and board and kit were included before you saw a penny ....butr you got value raher than a private company dealing out the bare minimum they can get away with whilst making the maximum profit .
Having to fill in a form if you want to have a slice of bread with your cup of tea..pure madness

[Mooks]

Are there any studies into the average british soldiers spending habits?

I live right next to several military bases (in virginia beach). And my brother is a bartender, every week their is a room full of sailors/pilots/grunts sitting their and as they say "drinking their paycheck away" (or pissing it away, whichever one you prefer). These guys are living paycheck to paycheck, and I wouldnt be suprised if some british soldiers are too.

If anyones curios as to why a underage teenager hangs out at a bar. I get free soda and get to listen to the ramblings and boasting of drunks. It amuses me.

[InsaneApache]

A mate of mine gave me kind permission to use his messages.

As for the house - Not only is it falling to pieces, but the army have contracted complete cowboys to fix any housing problems. There is a Private two doors down that hasn't had hot water in two and a half months.

Seriously, don't get me started on this

and

Well firstly thanks for that, and secondly the army do pay well, dependant on your rank, then spend the rest of the month taking it from you.

Thirdly, you ask any soldier ANY soldier if he's happy paying for seriously low substandard housing at a reduced cost, or whether he'd be happy to pay extra in the knowledge that he's not going to have to wait 13 months for a new cooker, even though the carbon dioxide alarm keeps going off. The army's answer to which was, yep, you guessed it. Replace the alarm.

I think we should pay more, maybe then our precious government could move up to giving us one set of body armour between two, instead of five.

This has all come in since Labour got into power. Oh and the IVA people have told me that if I can't keep up with the full payments, I will go bankrupt. When I told my paymaster, he informed me that if I ended up bankrupt I would be immediately discharged and would lose my pension.

I have now had to take up a second job, doing security, but cannot tell my Commander Officer, because if I did, I could be discharged.

I'nt life grand!

The incredible amount of over the top PC, especially in my current job has softened the soldier's of today. At quite an alarming rate.

As for you mate, Op tours can really effect people in many different ways. As can leaving the army and learning to adjust to Civvie street. I do have concerns that in four years time, after 22 years service, I'll be having to make that adjustment myself.

Aye, but the Canadians have the best rations of ANY armed forces, FACT!

One thing that hasn't been mentioned, is the quite incredible amount of money our current campaigns our costing this country a year. Something the government have fought tooth and nail to keep secret.

Whether those campaigns are right or wrong is another debate entirely. It just seems so very clear looking at our domestic front, that our country has suffered a great deal because of them, and the truly concerning thing, is that no-one, not Britain or America can predict when they will end.

Want to know the current count of British lives lost on these campaigns? We have an army network that we log into every day (I use to get on here at work), that has a front page that comes up much like most networks (but obviously unavailable to civilians). On that page (and I you not!) they is a new dedication picture every single day of a British soldier killed in one of our two current major campaigns. This is an in-depth conversion I had with ***** 6 months ago, and nothing has changed.

I believe the phase goes something like 'Media blanket'

I'll not you mate, moral is rock bottom and has been for three years. One of our squadrons has just come back from Afgan after fighting there for six months, had a month off, then started preparing for a six month tour of Iraq, to be carried out this year.

There have been over 40 divorces in our regiment alone because of our commitments to these campaigns and 34 AWOL's, and we are only a contingent of 900. It's a hard time for our soldiers, and of course their families.

How do you explain to a young child that their Daddy/Mother has to go away again for so long?

Your right in saying that I do try not to get into these types of debates, because most of us can only shake our head in disbelief at people that try to justify it.

Of course we are soldiers, and are duty bound. Yet we surely have the right to wonder why we are where we currently are in these seamlessly pointless and country crippling campaigns.

If you can’t afford to send our soldier’s to these multiple campaigns (600 just sent to Kosovo) with the correct equipment how can the government justify sending them at all?

All genuine quotes from a freind of a friend, re-posted here with his kind permission. No name no pack drill though.

An eye opener isn't it?

[master of the puppets]

So you guys would rather the government introduce rationing of the general publics supply?

[KukriKhan]

...the report, which was based on months of interviews with thousands of soldiers and their families between July 2007 and January 2008.

Isn't that the rub? It isn't just Corporal Jones going hungry; in fact, at $32K a year, he makes enough to feed himself quite well, and gets fed gratis while doing HM's military mission. It's when Cpl J tries to also feed his wife and 2.4 children on the UK economy that the trouble comes in, right?

Old soldiers in the 70's - and even into the 80's - used to wryly say:

"If the Army thought you needed a wife, they'd have issued you one."

Paying a professional pricetag for a professional, voluntary military (i.e. making their pay equal to or greater than police and firemen) has been an uphill battle for decades on both sides of the pond. The trouble has always been that wife and family thing, the "extra baggage" the soldier has accumulated that can't politically be ignored, but for which funding isn't thought important enough to provide.

Is feeding and housing Mrs. Cpl Jones critical to the success of the military mission in [fill-in-the-blank]?

[Devastatin Dave]

Then get out. That's what I did. Its still a voluntary force still right? I did 10 years, had some good times and bad times, got out and got paid. If life as a soldier sucks for you, then get out when your enlistments up. The hardships of a soldier is part of the life. Do it while your young so you have some funny stories to share with your mates at the tavern when its all said and done. The crappy base housing gave my wife plenty of memories. It sucked but these where the happiest times in hour life when we lived paycheck to paycheck and had to make sure myson didn't eat the lead paint chips pealing from the wall.

[Tribesman]

All genuine quotes from a freind of a friend, re-posted here with his kind permission.

It don't realy say much though does it .Perhaps your friend of a friend should have been in longer . Because f he had then he wouldn't make statements like .....

This has all come in since Labour got into power.

OK fair enough he can go on about the incresed Awol rates , but apart from that it all predates nu-lab ... perhaps for a neutralish perspective you could ask Banquo . Not of course supporting nu lab or any of that crap , but if you want to criticise them then criticise them for their policies that differ from the previous bunch of muppets .

Like for example this one .....

maybe then our precious government could move up to giving us one set of body armour between two, instead of five.

..which is fair enough ... then again you could go for the old switch and get body armour but go back to the hard wearing easily cleanable equipment that left you as a frazzled freak show if anyone so much as struck a match in your general direction

But here Apache , take this....

As for the house - Not only is it falling to pieces, but the army have contracted complete cowboys to fix any housing problems.

leaving aside taht it is nop longer the army that owns the houses or the army tha awards the contracts ..do you know how hard it used to be to get a housing contract when the army did own them and did award the contracts ?
For a bloody good reason ...they wanted a decent job done .
Market forces and the free market don't quite work in this respect because people can go in and make a killing and not give a damn about follow ups as they just go for the next contract with a new name .

[InsaneApache]

Perhaps your friend of a friend should have been in longer . Because f he had then he wouldn't make statements like .....
Quote:This has all come in since Labour got into power.

Ahem....

I do have concerns that in four years time, after 22 years service, I'll be having to make that adjustment myself.

I agree that the army houses should never have been sold off and leased back. I'm not a tribalist and I can see that the Tories are just as bad in many ways as the current scumbags. However after 11 years of a Labour government he does know what he's talking about. Furthermore they are in power now, not the Tories.

Remember this, the Tories didn't go running all over the world to satisfy neo-colonial ambitions. Labour did.

[Devastatin Dave]

Ahem....



I agree that the army houses should never have been sold off and leased back. I'm not a tribalist and I can see that the Tories are just as bad in many ways as the current scumbags. However after 11 years of a Labour government he does know what he's talking about. Furthermore they are in power now, not the Tories.

Remember this, the Tories didn't go running all over the world to satisfy neo-colonial ambitions. Labour did.

Jolly good response...

[Tribesman]

Jolly good response...

from Dave who supports neo colonialist ambitions

But OK apache , fair enogh , apart from their central American and Asian efforts they duidn't really do much in the way of deployments (OK apart from the 6 and gib and cyprus)and the malvinas) but hhey certainly went on the neo colonial influence peddling route by suppoting aiding arming and training murderous dictatorships in the name of British interests .

I do have concerns that in four years time, after 22 years service, I'll be having to make that adjustment myself.

Demob is always a dodgy time , it always has been , didn't he know that when he joined .

But come on Apache look at this....

There have been over 40 divorces in our regiment alone because of our commitments to these campaigns

...bollox . Seriouisly you must have been round garrison towns , overseas deployments mean bugger all , whats there is there and what happens goes on if the fella is out in the antarctic for a year or doing gate duty down the road till 6 O'clock.
I used to love them army jobs