MOD plan to withdraw all support for Biggin Hill Chapel

[aeropilot]

MOD have plans to withdraw all support by 2016 for the RAF Memorial Chapel at Biggin Hill - inappropiate use of MOD funds or some such bean-counter nonsense.

There's a e-pet been setup, seen links doing the rounds among ex-RAF who have signed.

Link to anyone that wishes to sign.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/73191

[Hooli]

Of course it should still be funded.

[ecsrobin]

So how come I can't find any information on the RAF funding this chapel or the fact they may be stopping the funding??

They have 12,000 visitors per year plus services. You can become a friend of the chapel to help fund it and no doubt the visitors donate when they arrive. And a new heritage centre is being built next door which will no doubt bring the visitors and money in.

Sounds like most e-petitions a load of crap.

[Mojocvh]

ecsrobin said:

So how come I can't find any information on the RAF funding this chapel or the fact they may be stopping the funding??

They have 12,000 visitors per year plus services. You can become a friend of the chapel to help fund it and no doubt the visitors donate when they arrive. And a new heritage centre is being built next door which will no doubt bring the visitors and money in.

Sounds like most e-petitions a load of crap.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

I like the IDEAL of the e-petition setup. Even if I don't think a % are worthy, I support the fact that they are there and have to be actioned as policy.

[zarjaz1991]

Mojocvh said:

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

I like the IDEAL of the e-petition setup. Even if I don't think a % are worthy, I support the fact that they are there and have to be actioned as policy.

They don't have to be actioned as policy at all.

[randlemarcus]

Is there one to support not spending a penny of public money on sky fairy supporters ever again?

[Mojocvh]

zarjaz1991 said:

Mojocvh said:

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

I like the IDEAL of the e-petition setup. Even if I don't think a % are worthy, I support the fact that they are there and have to be actioned as policy.

They don't have to be actioned as policy at all.

really? so they just ignore whatever they want? thanks, yet another reason to vote for real change then.

[zarjaz1991]

Mojocvh said:

really? so they just ignore whatever they want? thanks, yet another reason to vote for real change then.

If an e-petition gets more than 100,000 signatures, it "could" be debated in parliament. They don't actually have to do anything. It's little more than a scheme to make people THINK they can influence government policy.
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/how-it-works

[Munter]

E petitions allow gov to poll the population on their emotional state about topics.

And have a laugh at some loonys

[Chrisgr31]

ecsrobin said:

So how come I can't find any information on the RAF funding this chapel or the fact they may be stopping the funding??

They have 12,000 visitors per year plus services. You can become a friend of the chapel to help fund it and no doubt the visitors donate when they arrive. And a new heritage centre is being built next door which will no doubt bring the visitors and money in.

Sounds like most e-petitions a load of crap.

More information here http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?1332...

[ecsrobin]

Chrisgr31 said:

ecsrobin said:

So how come I can't find any information on the RAF funding this chapel or the fact they may be stopping the funding??

They have 12,000 visitors per year plus services. You can become a friend of the chapel to help fund it and no doubt the visitors donate when they arrive. And a new heritage centre is being built next door which will no doubt bring the visitors and money in.

Sounds like most e-petitions a load of crap.

More information here http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?1332...

So an article from a magazine is the cause of this? Where can I find the official statement from the MOD?

[7mike]

randlemarcus said:

Is there one to support not spending a penny of public money on sky fairy supporters ever again?

One or two in there somewhere:

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/search?q=religion

[Chrisgr31]

ecsrobin said:

So an article from a magazine is the cause of this? Where can I find the official statement from the MOD?

Don't ask me I was just linking further information about it. However the story was on the BBC last night and is now all over the media and social media. If it was untrue I would expect the MOD to be denying it, and they aren't.

So therefore I assume it is true. I guess you could email the MOD although you might struggle to find the right team.

[NicD]

Its in the Daily Mail now.
I just signed the petition

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2895622/Wh...

[ecsrobin]

Surprisingly the daily mail explains it a bit more in between all the doom and gloom headlines. Whilst I do believe we should remember those who gave so much for us I also believe £50,000PA is a lot of money.

Within the MOD cuts are being made everywhere. We struggled to even get enough stationary and often relied on stealing from fast jet squadrons or getting free promotional pens from friends in civilian industry. So if that £50,000 will go towards people being able to do their day job within the MOD then so be it.

However the article does state they want it to remain open and this should be picked up by the local council or numerous charities out there that would no doubt be able to assist.

[Chrisgr31]

ecsrobin said:

Within the MOD cuts are being made everywhere. We struggled to even get enough stationary and often relied on stealing from fast jet squadrons or getting free promotional pens from friends in civilian industry. So if that £50,000 will go towards people being able to do their day job within the MOD then so be it.

The problem is we all know that it won't go towards enabling people to do their day job. The reality is that £50,000 or stationary cost is a drop in the ocean when it comes to MOD expenditure. The real money savings should be made in ship building, aircraft, tank and other specialist vehicle purchasing.

If they decided what they were going to order, ordered it, and didnt change their minds during the build phase (obviously some (much) of that is politics) our defence forces could have the kit they need at a lower cost and quicker. A better solution all round.

[loafer123]

Very true, but all the £50k savings also add up to a lot when combined.

[ecsrobin]

Both very good points.

I do think it's in this nations interest to keep this church/memorial open however I don't believe it should be from the MOD budget.

Now if everyone who had signed that petition paid £10 your on your way to 2 years of running costs.

[davepoth]

Chrisgr31 said:

ecsrobin said:

Within the MOD cuts are being made everywhere. We struggled to even get enough stationary and often relied on stealing from fast jet squadrons or getting free promotional pens from friends in civilian industry. So if that £50,000 will go towards people being able to do their day job within the MOD then so be it.

The problem is we all know that it won't go towards enabling people to do their day job. The reality is that £50,000 or stationary cost is a drop in the ocean when it comes to MOD expenditure. The real money savings should be made in ship building, aircraft, tank and other specialist vehicle purchasing.

If they decided what they were going to order, ordered it, and didnt change their minds during the build phase (obviously some (much) of that is politics) our defence forces could have the kit they need at a lower cost and quicker. A better solution all round.

Precisely. The reason the MoD has no money are the enormous procurement foul-ups that go on. Quite how we spend as much as we do and still have enormous capability gaps is beyond me.

[Ginge R]

http://www.sevenoakschronicle.co.uk/Biggin-Hill-Ai...

Airport steps in.