Mail: "Hard-Up MoD Spends £9 Million On Recruitment... Despite Laying Off Staff"

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by soleil, Oct 13, 2011.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker War Hero Moderator

    Whilst appreciating it's the Daily Mail, if a true quote, it's stunning logic by the Ministers that claim they know better about defence than the joint Chiefs of Defence.
     
  2. Hansard, Wednesday 12 October 2011

    "DEFENCE

    Armed Forces: Recruitment


    Mr Kevan Jones:

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much his Department has spent on recruitment advertising for the (a) Army, (b) Royal Navy and Royal Marines and (c) Royal Air Force since May 2010. [71068]



    Mr Robathan

    [holding answer 9 September 2011]: It is a key requirement for each of the armed forces to maintain a satisfactory balance of skills, experience, ability and seniority in rank to enable delivery of operational requirements. Despite the reduction in overall numbers of service personnel, and the associated need for a redundancy programme, the armed forces must still recruit and train personnel to replace those who leave the services at the end of their current engagements. In order to maintain that balance each service continues to recruit where personnel are required, including those trades/branches which are historically difficult to fill due to the requirement of specialist qualifications or experience.

    The Ministry of Defence has spent £5.19 million for the Army, £2.20 million for the Royal Navy, and £1.85 million for the Royal Air Force on recruitment advertising since May 2010. These figures include current television advertising and short notice opportunity low value advertising in magazines in newspapers."

     
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2011
  3. The Daily Mail doesn't "get it", has never "got it" and probably never will "get it" - and that is graphically demonstrated by the increasingly hysterical outpourings of my own mother and my mother in law - both of whom lap up the Daily Mail's perpetual stream of gibberish and dumbed down nonsense as if it were hand written on tablets delivered from the mount.
     
  4. Bit of a non-story really, isn't it? Liked the caption where the junior minister "admitted" the cost, rather than simply answered a direct question.

    Or is this just another way to ratchet up more pressure on Dr Fox albeit indirectly?

    Usual Daily Wail faecal matter.
     

  5. If I was being kind, I'd like to think that he meant: '...short notice, low cost advertising...' because no-one wastes money on low value expenditure.

    OTOH this is direct from the MOD's mouth, complete with a large foot still inserted.
     

Share This Page