Army battalions could be axed or merged Around 20,000 soldiers are due to be cut from the Army
cuts 'risk military skills'
Entire British Army infantry and armoured units could be abolished or merged to save money, Philip Hammond has warned.

interview with The Daily Telegraph, he indicated Currently about one in 10 Army soldiers come from outside the UK.

(MoD) says no decisions been made,
Other cost-cutting measures include cuts of about 35% to heavy artillery, and a 40% reduction in the numbers of Challenger 2 tanks.


Mr Hammond told the Telegraph .
"Clearly the Army cannot get smaller by 17% without losing some units," he said.

Start Quote
Jim Murphy
Shadow defence secretary
"I cannot say to you that there will be no loss of battalions in the infantry as we downsize the Army. We are looking at the armoured corps."


An MoD spokesman told the BBC no single regiment was "singled out", .regiments in Scotland were not at greater risk despite reported difficulties in recruiting
Such regiments include the Black Watch, Green Howards and Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders.

Shadow defence secretary Jim Murphy said: "The defence community will be dismayed that history is being dismissed.
"The Army is currently 'top heavy', planned to cut senior officers .
"Savings have to be made and Army restructuring is required, about 10,200 people were recruited to the Army last year, with more than 9,000 from the UK.
from abroad Ghana (123 ), the Gambia (54) and South Africa (55).

Plugged'..? I can see Hammond as the little Dutch Boy'...Sticking his finger in the dike'...But thats another story....lol

so the books are balanced

£38 billion jst like that

a slight of hand no doubt


and all in two years

should be working for a bank


well perhaps not

National savings have been made and "black holes " plugged, but from now on war games will only be played on X Boxes!

If you believe that then you will believe anything. What he means is, it is forecast to be plugged, not just by what they have told everyone now, but planned future cuts already agreed on. The reduction of a further 2 Tornado sqns (out of 6 left) the reduction of the ISTAR aircraft, reduction and drawdown of Merlin helicopters, the further reductions of army "hardware" and continued re-roling/cutting to light (cheaper) forces, buying less F35s, less "new Lynx", not taking up already contracted numbers for subs and ships etc etc.....you think its bad now wait until we are fully out of Afghan from the combat role, then the real cuts start.......!!!

If there is no more debt and they can afford to keep the Armed forces the way they are then why are they going to make even more people redundant. It just seems like such a waste.

Should we believe this because the u-turn on the fighter jets and ships has cost a lot more money than it has and the Navy has said the scrapping of the Ark Royal cost us a lot more to fight in Libya than it should have or is there spin on this issue?