The Italian AEW merlins are significantly less capable than both the Hawkeye, and if what I have heard is correct also the current RN AEW capability. That mdest increase in capability could be achieved with very little cost increase. In fact I would dispute the idea of it being a modest increase, the ability to launch your aircraft from a a greater distance from the target is always advantageous as is the increased deep penetration capability and the addition of the Hawkeye would be a massive capability boost. Pilots have to be trained whether it is on a STOLV plane or a CTOL one, the maintenance costs are likely to favour the CTOL variant although this is disputable. The harsh reality is that the RN is sacrificing what could be a substantial capability increase for the sake of maintaining a tradition that only exists becouse of budget cuts in the first case.
The CVF programme offers to give the UK capability that it hasnt had since the 1970s only greater, the two ships will be capable of far more days at sea and will have significantly greater firepower (courtesy of sortie rate, better aircraft etc). The only advantage of the STOLV is that it is STOLV, it makes no difference to combat flight profile other than the fact that it shortens it and reduces the weapons load-I realy dont understand how you can argue that it is superior over shorter ranges-its simply not.
The extra cost would be highly limited, we still aquire the same number of aircraft for similar cost, still have to train the pilots (only we can do it in the states), still buy the ships, the only difference is the catapults and arrestor gear and this is effectively already being developed becouse of the french PA2. On the other hand the capability of the Carriers would be increased as would the aircraft they carry.
By MoD waste I was thinking of the Nimrod MRA4, the infamous chinook debcle and of course that oh so usefull study in to aquiring a ex-US LPH.

STOLV flexibility is a bit of myth, to operate any aircraft for any period of time you need substantial facilitys, fuel weapons, maintenance equipment etc etc. Therefore you have to have a base to receive all this, if you on expeditionary intervention type warfare you will have to fly in such supplies, therefore you need a runway anyway.
The CVF’s will not have there own in flight refuelling capability, so this will either have to be provided by allies or using nearby airbases-both cases meaning fully equiped air fields nearby.
For all of this flexibility the British are sacrificing aircraft range and weapons carriage as well as limiting their ships to just helicopters to perform other dutys, for instance they will not be able to operate the Hawkeye.

Ed, if that was such a majoe issue Britain would have opted for the CTOL version of the JSF not compromise performance and go for the VSTOL variant.

Every recent model shown at defexpos and the CG’s from thales and the other companys involved show a single Island arrangement.

Lets put it this way, the CVF’s will be the only carriers in th world with two Islands. Even the french who have selected a similar design have opted for only a single Island.

becouse thats the design Thales offered and it was considered technically better than the one BAE offered.
Britain is a country that hasnt built a true CV since the end of WW2-the lack of experience is showing in my opinion.

At the end of the day Britain is suffering from decimating its own aerospace Industry.
I suspect that for obvious reasons the US wiil keep the export standards for the F-35 just above the quality of the Rafale, and I realy cant see the French giving production rights for the type. The harsh reality is that the best option now is for Britain to keep negotiating for the F-35-the french cant offer a better plane and they wont offer a better contract.

If you increase the number of powers with the veto the likelyhood of a resolution being vetoed increases, That is what would make the UN irrelevent as NOTHING would happen.
Ultimately, for the time being the UN needs the US to have the veto for the simple reason that it keeps the US within the UN system.