Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Tue Apr 28, 2020 10:06 pm  

wotsupcas wrote:

So if you were in charge how many of those people would you sack? And therein lies the problem. I wish, like you, that it was a perfect world without the need for arms. But it isn't and if we don't sell them someone else will.

If we were a member of the EU we could have a coordinated manufacture & procurement policy plus a ready market, hence an economy of scale.

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Wed Apr 29, 2020 1:18 am  

wrencat1873 wrote:

If we are saying that there has to be that number of employees within the industry, to enable us to arm and protect ourselves and the consequence of that is that there will be "X" spare capacity, then a decision has to be made as to whether to allow the excess "stock" to be sold elsewhere and how to control those sales or, should the industry be "shrunk", in order to prevent having to "chase" sales to "dodgy" customers.

You would think where the supply of arms is concerned, it should be on a defence and safety remit and not just selling additional arms because we have over capacity ??

There is an episode of 'Yes Minister' where Jim Hacker faces a moral dilemma when he learns that British manufactured arms are ending up in the hands of Italian terrorists.

Brings a little humour to your comments and is worth a look.

"Yes Minister" Series 3. Episode 6. "The Whiskey Priest".

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Wed Apr 29, 2020 8:14 am  

wrencat1873 wrote:

Do we really ??

Yes, manufacturing these items would mean that we COULD sell them to other nations but it doesn't mean that we HAVE to ??
We could just produce equipment for our own armed forces and not feel that we have to supply other nations / groups.

Of course there can be deals done to reciprocate the supply of arms but, when we begin to offer such things to "unstable" governments / nations, there is always the danger that they will be used either against us or against our allies.
The only reason that some of these things are sold to "dodgy" organisations is to make money.

I think you are missing a point - the R&D required on some of these projects is vast - similar to pharmaceuticals - unless you can spread this cost over volume of product it is simply uneconomic to develop cutting edge technology. No point going into battle with one hand tied behind your back because the planes/tanks are not up to it. So unless you think the British tax payer should pay well over the odds what is the alternative - these businesses employ tens of thousands of people.

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Wed Apr 29, 2020 8:16 am  

silver2 wrote:

If we were a member of the EU we could have a coordinated manufacture & procurement policy plus a ready market, hence an economy of scale.

Why would we it didn't happen when were a member what would change if we had stayed in?

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Wed Apr 29, 2020 10:47 am  

The biographer for Boris Johnson was on the radio earlier and when asked he didn't know how may children he had (abandoned). To be fair to him though he is consistent, in that he doesn't want to tell us an accurate birth or death rate.

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Wed Apr 29, 2020 9:24 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Why would we it didn't happen when were a member what would change if we had stayed in?

My comment was a bit of a wind up. In reality we did have coordinated policies for the Tornado and Eurofighter. Both however were flawed designs but as the Saudis have a history of buying British I suspect a deal was done to ensure continuity even though it was politically embarrassing.

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Thu Apr 30, 2020 12:52 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

I think you are missing a point - the R&D required on some of these projects is vast - similar to pharmaceuticals - unless you can spread this cost over volume of product it is simply uneconomic to develop cutting edge technology. No point going into battle with one hand tied behind your back because the planes/tanks are not up to it. So unless you think the British tax payer should pay well over the odds what is the alternative - these businesses employ tens of thousands of people.

And therein lays the conundrum.

You would expect that "allies" would share their technology (up to a point) but, regardless of cost and loss of business, arming dangerous groups should be absolutely off limits.
Of course there is diplomacy at work all over the world and deals done for all sorts of reasons but, the rationale of selling arms to the Saudis "because we have to sell them somewhere to balance the book" is just ridiculous.

Lets face it, the majority of recent conflicts involving the UK have been over oil or drugs, ultimately falling at the feet of our major ally, the USofA

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Thu Apr 30, 2020 2:09 pm  

wrencat1873 wrote:

And therein lays the conundrum.

You would expect that "allies" would share their technology (up to a point) but, regardless of cost and loss of business, arming dangerous groups should be absolutely off limits.
Of course there is diplomacy at work all over the world and deals done for all sorts of reasons but, the rationale of selling arms to the Saudis "because we have to sell them somewhere to balance the book" is just ridiculous.

Lets face it, the majority of recent conflicts involving the UK have been over oil or drugs, ultimately falling at the feet of our major ally, the USofA

So I'll ask again. How many thousands of jobs (people) are you willing to lose so we can salve your conscience? I don't mean this in a confrontational way but there would be a huge financial cost to individuals in taking the moral high ground. Would you be willing to sack them?

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Thu Apr 30, 2020 2:40 pm  

wotsupcas wrote:

So I'll ask again. How many thousands of jobs (people) are you willing to lose so we can salve your conscience? I don't mean this in a confrontational way but there would be a huge financial cost to individuals in taking the moral high ground. Would you be willing to sack them?

Counter question - Industries get wiped out all the time. The British coal, steel, textile, shoemaking and pottery industries have either all but gone, or have been reduced to miniscule operations in the grand scheme of things. Why does the arms industry get a free pass?

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Thu Apr 30, 2020 2:52 pm  

King Street Cat wrote:

Counter question - Industries get wiped out all the time. The British coal, steel, textile, shoemaking and pottery industries have either all but gone, or have been reduced to miniscule operations in the grand scheme of things. Why does the arms industry get a free pass?

Because its one thing that we are very good at innovation - and its where the UK really a powerhouse. If we look at all the other things you mentioned these are commoditised they can be produced anywhere - we cannot manufacture mass produced products cost effectively that is not the future for high cost populations. Highly sophisticated planes/tanks etc now that is a different ball game.