Originally Posted by Re-Heat
But that is completely misguided, as without the profit incentive, it is not only a proven fact that organisations will waste money, but one that has been proven time and again with formerly state-owned enterprises shedding fat and providing better services once they are subject to competition (except the trains).
Essentially prices charged to the defence budget will be lower even with the profit incentive, as formally bloated areas that have no commencial justification are wiped out - for example swathes of management eliminated from BA since privatisation for example.
Reheat
You're missing my point. I don't dispute much of what you say but the way in which the transition to QQ/Dstl was implemented meant that the budget that previously funded them was NOT shared among the projects that used them. My example is typical. A huge % increase in project cost, with no extra provision. I got the same excellent service as I always did from BD, at greater cost (as they added profit), but my Customer had to ditch much needed capability. This was repeated on all my projects at the time, and it will happen again. What I describe is a de facto cut in the Defence Budget.
Privitisation has created swathes of management in QQ and Dstl, mainly non productive commercial and finance staff. And an equal number in DPA and DLO to deal with them. Given a policy of "staff neutral" changes, all this means is that all organisations have lost the people who directly carry out the respective primary roles. This is a greater waste and the more difficult to correct. If you want to conduct MoD business like BA, then show us the timetable for future conflicts and we'll make ready. I suggest we need to retain flexibility.