Why is it that whenever politicians try to defend the defence budget they always use the term, "bad for the economy of the area", rather than the most important issue, "bad for the defence of British interests abroad".
Now, with piracy making the news almost every day, it seems the perfect time to get away from this wishy washy claim and get down to the real reasons. Piracy is something even the layman can identify with and they can see our warships making a difference (I feel they think they make more a difference than they actually do). Don't we need someone to point out this link; that by underfunding the navy we seriously risk our abilities to combat such issues?
Obviously the fact that we're in a conflict zone (having just left a second) is a better reason, but I'm not sure that this is a hot favourite of Joe public right now.
"The Reform group said axing the carriers, and Eurofighter and Nimrod planes could save Â£2.7bn over the next decade."
Why not disband the whole of the armed forces, think of the savings then. Why not take it another step and cut the police, fire and ambulance services; more money saved. We could cut schools, hospitals and every other form of public services. There would be millions of people unemployed, anarchy in the streets, no defence of our country or its interests but we'd be saving so much money.
Typical politicians, they dont have no clue do they.
As others have said, with piracy on the rise and the ever increasing demand for imported goods we need a strong Navy.
We're an Island, have they forgotten that? We need a strong Navy and more funding