They have varying views on the value of attached to a life, so tend to have less of a safety, assurance and process overhead. And they're not all as fussed as Sir Humphrey about accounting for every last penny of government money, so can survive with small procurement and accounting arms. That's the way our money goes....
It is ironic that the most wasteful programme (RMPA/Nimrod 2000/Nimrod MRA4) failed because it did NOT adhere to “safety, assurance and process”.
If, in the early 90s, those responsible for oversight had adhered to Sir Humphrey’s regulations (in this case, those issued by PUS as Chief Accounting Officer), then it would indeed have been a “replacement”, instead of a modification of Nimrod.
Same applies to another money pit, Chinook HC Mk3.
Then look at the common denominators. THAT is where the problem lies.
It has been proven time and again how to deliver to time, cost and performance. It isn’t that MoD can’t do it. It is because they fear raising the bar so rail against those who do.