The Times:
The cowardice of Downing Street
The case of the “suppressed” defence procurement report tells us much about Gordon Brown’s Government. None of it good.
It should come as little surprise that the Government is refusing to publish a report telling inconvenient truths. Downing Street has a bit of previous in this department, after all. But its behaviour has been particularly brazen.
The background is that Bernard Gray, a former Ministry of Defence adviser, was commissioned by John Hutton, Defence Secretary at the time, to lead a review of the way the MoD buys equipment. According to defence industry executives, the final version was delivered to senior MoD officials in the first week of July and was due to be published on July 15.
When it failed to appear, the government spinners’ first response was that it wasn’t finished, which was patently untrue. Now the line is that the report is to be used as part of the Government’s plans for a strategic defence review, to be held after next year’s election.
That Mr Hutton twice made a commitment to the House of Commons that the report would be published this year seems to have been conveniently forgotten. At least, forgotten by Downing Street. The MoD appears to have been willing for it to be published, which may explain why some of its findings have now been leaked.
Defence industry executives briefed on the report say it is no surprise that Downing Street is nervous. It presents a devastating critique of procurement processes that waste an estimated £2 billion a year. It also makes it chillingly clear that huge cuts in planned spending are inevitable, with very serious consequences for one of Britain’s biggest industries.
The problem is that the military chiefs want everything they see in the sweet shop and the officials and politicians can’t say no. When they run out of money, as they always do, orders are merely postponed, which raises costs and stores up more problems. In the case of the recently postponed aircraft carriers, which were clearly unaffordable when first ordered, the extra cost was £1 billion.
It has all got so out of hand that the report suggests the current programme is 50 per cent more than the MoD could afford, even if its budget was maintained in real terms.
The dysfunctional process has badly damaged the industry. The escalating cost of old programmes has squeezed the budget for new systems, which are the ones with export potential.
Cuts are inevitable. How they are implemented will be hugely important to Britain’s Armed Forces and the defence industry. There will be very tough choices requiring real political courage. But don’t hold your breath. This government doesn’t even have the courage to publish a report.