Aircraft Carrier Costs Double

[MovedGoalPosts]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24801942

officials had made basic errors, such as failing to factor in the cost of inflation and VAT

What the Hell. Are our civil servants fit for purpose? In private industry errors on this level would lead to disciplinary action.

We've had the fiasco over rail tenders going awry as the people drawing up contracts couldn't count properly. Now there is this.

The coalition may claim that they are inherited a flawed contract. But it was awarded 6 years ago, and as probably one of the largest deals ever you'd think both the previous and current government would have looked at it closely. Margaret Hodge (labour and a senior member of the last government) now wrings hands as chairwoman of the Public accounts committee and states there is commercial risk.

[Derek]

IIRC the contract was filled with so many clauses and cancellation fees it was almost impossible to back out of it.

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

Changing the type of jets that are to be used, twice(!), doesn't help keep costs down. There's also a spec. creep that afflicts most military contracts and the private company's make sure that they don't carry the can for that.

Having said that the civil servants that sign these contacts seem very naive.

Indeed ,hammers cost a £1000 each don't ya know

The MoD does seem to have a particular problem with cost control. I'm not surprised to hear they're defeating even Philip Hammond, who has a fearsome bean-counting reputation.

Yes, the carrier contracts were drawn up in such a way as to make them almost impossible to cancel and this was undoubtedly a political calculation by Labour, which signed them off, but TBH for once I think they were right. Long term strategic planning is not something this country is very good at (look at how we're still wringing our hands over HS2) but the UK's wealth and power was built on global trade which in turn was safeguarded by a Royal Navy which really did rule the waves. Two carrier groups (assuming both are ever in service at the same time, which is unlikely) are not going to put us back at the top of the heap but a strong naval force will allow us to play our part in keeping the world peaceful, and therefore more prosperous.

[MovedGoalPosts]

I don't disagree with the need for proper carrier facilities. But that the costs involved can't be controlled is something that those who entered into the contract should be ashamed of.

[Osem]

Please someone tell me what happens to the people who sign these contracts and oversee the repeated budgetary failures within the likes of the MOD. Likewise, what awful fate befell those who got the sums so badly wrong during the West Coast line debacle I wonder...

Originally Posted by Osem

Please someone tell me what happens to the people who sign these contracts and oversee the repeated budgetary failures within the likes of the MOD. Likewise, what awful fate befell those who got the sums so badly wrong during the West Coast line debacle I wonder...

You do remember Yes Minister?

[Hom3r]

It would have been cheaper to retro fit the ones they just scrapped.

[SMG]

Originally Posted by Chris

The MoD does seem to have a particular problem with cost control. I'm not surprised to hear they're defeating even Philip Hammond, who has a fearsome bean-counting reputation.

The MoD has a history of buying crap for our forces, & spending billions extra on contracts. The MoD is a cash cow. Always has been.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

You do remember Yes Minister?

Oddly enough I've never seen a single episode of that for one reason or another, but I think I know what you're getting at.

This contract to build these carriers was a complete disaster and typical of the MOD in matters like this. There is a complete disconnect between the frontline personel who are amongs if not the finest in the world and the administrative side that fails them every time. It is time cut's were made on the administrative side and not the frontline side because we have more desk warriors then active serrvice personelin our army it' s ridiculous. I remember speaking to IDF troops albeit many years ago and how they are setup so much more efficient then how we do things.

I think israel has less then 1500 people in it's appropreations department whilst we have nearly twenty thousand (might be a little out on figures as i'm remembering years ago) also they have a lot of former service people from the various branches whose input is welcomed and acted on in relation to equipment we do not. Well technically we do but at the end of the day they get ignored if the desk warrriors think they know better. Massive chunk of the defence budget is taken up by the admin side and the stupid decisions they continue to make day in day out.

Government contracts often do seem to be cash cows. For many of them there isn't any real competition and they just fleece the Government who don't seem to be aggressive enough with cost control. Look at the tagging scandal with G4S and Serco.....

[Osem]

I wonder if these people are as cavalier with their own money as they are with ours...

[Osem]

Well HMS Queen Elizabeth has finally arrived in Portsmouth.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-40936071

Quite a sight. Even more so when some aircraft are on the deck!...

[denphone]

A wonderful sight Osem but not exactly great in that it won't be fully operational until 2020 as if we had a major conflict tomorrow we would not have this great aircraft carrier at our disposal.