Defence procurement slammed

[escapee]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3930703.stm

Interesting reading, as if we didn't already know.

[Jackonicko]

"Defence kit system 'unacceptable'

The MPs are worried about more costs for Eurofighter

British troops face "unacceptable" defence cuts and delays for vital kit because equipment orders have run £3bn over budget, say MPs.

In a damning report, the Commons defence committee says the government's efforts to improve the way it orders kit has "failed on almost all counts".

The performance of the Ministry of Defence's procurement agency in 2002-3 was "woeful", say the MPs' report.

Major kit orders will arrive 18 months late, even without more delay, it adds.

Wider cuts?

The committee's report says the cost over-runs "must lead to cancellations or cuts in equipment projects, or delays in ordering the equipment".

"Such substantial cost increases are also likely to have an impact beyond defence procurement and result in cuts elsewhere," say the MPs.


The last thing the armed forces need to worry about is whether or not critical equipment will turn up on time, or at all

Bruce George
Commons defence committee

"Given the recent pressures on our armed forces we believe such impacts would be unacceptable."

The report says there is a "fear culture" in the Defence Procurement Agency which means problems in projects get hidden and remain undetected for years.

The MoD's failure to invest enough money and take risks out of schemes is a key underlying cause of the poor performance, it argues.

BBC defence correspondent Paul Adams said the report's harsh criticism went further than a National Audit Office report in January which also highlighted problems.

Not so smart?

The ministry claims that the "smart acquisition" tactics launched six years ago have saved the taxpayer £2bn.

But the MPs say they have no confidence in the reliability of that government estimate and argue "smart acquisition" has not delivered its promised benefits.

"Its objectives were to procure equipment faster, cheaper and better. On almost all counts, it has failed to deliver."

Among project problems highlighted are:


* Joint Strike Fighter : weight problems on the planes, to be carried by the two new Royal Navy aircraft carriers, could affect the date they can go into service

* The Typhoon (also known as Eurofighter): The MoD is right to adapt the planes to multi-role aircraft for the second stage of the project but is "optimistic" in claiming it will not affect the costs

* New armoured vehicles: The planned 2009 in-service date for the Future Rapid Effects System is "unrealistic".

The report said: "We are forced to conclude that our Armed Forces have been let down by the organisation tasked with equipping them."

The MoD has accused the MPs of "raking over" well-known statistics and denies there is any culture problem at the ministry.

'Unfair'

Defence Procurement Minister Lord Bach said it was "absolute nonsense" to suggest troops were being let down and he denied the problems could prompt new defence cuts.

Lord Bach told BBC Radio 4's Today programme 2002-3 had been a "lousy year" but it had been "caused by delay and cost over-runs for legacy projects, projects some of which have been running for 20 years."

He said the criticisms were unfair as smart acquisition had not had time to turn around many years of procurement problems.

But committee chairman Bruce George called the problems outlined "quite staggering".

"Our armed forces are having to deal with many new security challenges in conditions where they are already overstretched and under-staffed," said the Labour MP.

"The last thing they need to worry about is whether or not critical equipment will turn up on time, or at all."

The MPs are pleased good progress is now being made on the Astute attack submarine and Nimrod aircraft programmes.

But they worry delays in decision-making at the MoD are causing problems for defence manufacturers, with the risk that some smaller firms could go out of business altogether.

And America's introduction of protectionist trade measures could harm the special transatlantic relationship, they warn."

[bangin0ut]

Not surprised by any of this! Several years ago a smartly dressed chap gave a presenation about Smart Procurement using an ugrade to a certain anti-radiation missile as an example.

As I remember he claimed that there wasnt enough money left in the pot for the upgrade, but there would be in 3 years time. Rightly the company who were going to carry out the upgrade said they would put the people earmarked for this project onto others as they couldnt afford to have them sitting around for three years twiddling their thumbs.

Not being too happy that all the experience would dissapear from the program they MoD decide to pay x million a year to keep the team together.

Anyway to cut a long story short, 3 years at x million a year plus the cost of the upgrade as well worked out about 5 times the original cost in the first place!

He never could explain how as a taxpayer I was getting value for money through Smart Procurement!