PDA

View Full Version : MOD Under fire....... CS Unions complain...


GengisKhant
28th Mar 2006, 12:13
The Ministry of Defence will come under furious assault from CS unions over concerns that its £19bn plan to overhaul the training of the armed forces puts service personnels security at risk.
The government is in the midst of selecting two private-sector contractors to take over training as part of the £19bn Defence Training Review. It is one of the largest private finance initiatives ever.
Vying for the first contract is the MC3 consortium consisting of BAE Systems, VT Group, Carillion and Flagship Training. It is pitted against Metrix, which consists of Qinetiq, Land Securities, Raytheon and EDS.
Bids for the second package - for training in logistics, policing, languages and photography - see Metrix, again, against Holdfast, which includes Babcock, Mowlem and TQ Education.
But civil servants union PCS believes that with only three consortia bidding for the two contracts, there is insufficient competition for a meaningful contest. The union also believes that outsourcing tens of thousands of staff to the private sector will leave the MoD in a perilous position should the contracts go awry.
PCS national officer Paul Barnsley said: Im not just concerned about increasing costs; I think the contractors will have the government over a barrel. He added that two months ago a component of a 10-year, £1bn IT infrastructure contract had to be taken in-house and said the MoD refusal to allow staff to bid for contracts beggars belief.
The PCS will outline its concerns to MPs at a Defence Select Committee hearing, which will investigate MoD procurement minister Lord Draysons plans to put relations between contractors and the government on a new platform through the training review.
A spokeswoman for the MoD said: The MoD will always choose the best value for money option in the procurement process. Sometimes this will be an in-house solution, sometimes this will be external to the MoD. In this case, an in-house bid was not a feasible option as the significant capital investment required to transform future specialist training means that this is not affordable.

GengisK :ok:

A2QFI
28th Mar 2006, 12:54
"The Ministry of Defence will come under furious assault from CS unions over concerns that its £19bn plan to overhaul the training of the armed forces puts service personnels security at risk."

Puts what aspect of their security at risk? Their jobs or their lives? Either way why are CS unions interested, they aren't "Service Personnel" in the true sense of the words so why are they making a fuss?

Safety_Helmut
28th Mar 2006, 12:58
In this case, an in-house bid was not a feasible option as the significant capital investment required to transform future specialist training means that this is not affordable.

Short term gain.................long term pain :mad:

S_H

Cambridge Crash
28th Mar 2006, 15:44
A2QFI
I think that you are being a little harsh on civil servants. Is contracting out all but war-fighting tasks the best way ahead? How will it enhance the lot of service personnel? Yes - civil servants are worried about their security and many - if not the large majority - work for a relative pittance and devote their lives in support of the Armed Services. I have worked with civil servants on station, on operations and in the MOD and in Agencies - civil servants provide much needed yet often mundane continuity. They have been treated in a shabby manner and their loyalty has been rewarded by betrayal. Being TUPE'd to a commerical organisation is a let-out for the government and a short step from eventual redundancy.
CC

A2QFI
24th Apr 2006, 18:44
CC. I was a Civil Servant for 11 years myself and was under the impression, wrongly perhaps, that they cannot be ordered to serve overseas or in areas of conflict. They may volunteer but can they be compelled? I thought not but I am willing to be told something different! When I was at a VSTOL base, which had many detachments, I never heard of the stores/drivers/chefs who were civilian going on det.

roush
24th Apr 2006, 19:01
Vying for the first contract is the MC3 consortium consisting of BAE Systems, VT Group, Carillion and Flagship Training. It is pitted against Metrix, which consists of Qinetiq, Land Securities, Raytheon and EDS.
GengisK :ok:

I say give it to EDS. They have proved themselves beyond doubt with the fantastic introduction of JPA. What could go wrong?

tablet_eraser
25th Apr 2006, 19:24
Roush,

The Scottish Officer....

roush
25th Apr 2006, 20:16
Roush,

The Scottish Officer....

Which one........seen many

Cambridge Crash
26th Apr 2006, 08:33
A2QFI

Professional grades - DFS, POLADs, LEGADs, Civ Secs, PQEs, - as well as a raft of administrative UKBC continue to serve on (larger) operations, albeit in base area jobs, but not without a element of risk which they choose to accept. Then there are those civil servants from OWOB who also spend a lot of time overseas...

Lima Juliet
26th Apr 2006, 21:41
Quote:
Originally Posted by tablet_eraser
Roush,

The Scottish Officer....


Which one........seen many

BANGALL!...sorry still can't bring myself to say this wretched man's name (but the spelling is close. The saddest thing is that he's still sh@fting us all even when he's left the Service now that he works for EDS (JPA for example).

BAG...BA...BAGNNN...sorry it's no good...http://forums.mg-rover.org/images/smilies/cussing.gif

roush
26th Apr 2006, 21:47
Say no more please

Know exactly who you mean and didn't wish to cause you such anguish.

Again sorry