Easy. Fire everyone involved so far, have negotiating ministers with realistic view of money, bring in accountability laws, and make defense procurement about production capacity rather than units made, with contracts covering the whole life of the project
How to fix defense spending? Stop buying every single thing from BAE. Everything they make is over budget and behind schedule. Also make defense contractors accountable if they cannot deliver within budget and schedule, instead of shoving in more taxpayer money.
The biggest problem in all this is the completely incompetent Civil Service personnel at the MoD, they like to build empires that introduce long protracted and inefficient processes and they do not like change at all. The change needs to start there, get rid of the people who cannot do their jobs efficiently.
Speaker seems to be suffering from Mike Johnson syndrome. All the British army has to do is to go and ask Ukraine what THEY would spend our money on. I expect they would at least treble the size of the army and create a drone corps. They would buy 2000 old Bradleys from the US and get them working. This way, if we have to fight, we will at least have some people and basic equipment to do it with.
Have multiple companies, it incentivises competition to make things better and hopefully cheaper, fire those suspected of corruption and bolster the budget
Dear God where does one start: TSR2? Cancelled, then paid a fortune for not buying F111 ended up with slower Phantom because it had to have Rolls Royce Engines. Nimrod AEW? Remember Cameron scrapping the lot! Retiring the Hercules early and 40 Typhoons leaving what? Selling the Harrier Force to the Yanks! wept that day Chieftain - useless engine. Challenger three, called that because there are three of them! SA80 total junk and cost the earth to fix.. Ajax (dont even start me) Two aircraft carriers that have no aircraft (we have to borrow them off the yanks) cant protect themselves, spend more time being fixed than at sea. Escort ships retired as they have no sailors to man them. Cost the earth, have no catapults and can only fly off choppers and F35s we cannot afford. Navy has more admirals than ships... Could be the problem there eh! Never mind the fact that the entire British Army would not fill Wembley stadium following years of Tory hollowing out of the forces to the point the Navy couldnt defend the Serpentine, The Army cant ever field a full division and the RAF is now just a private flying club incapable of defending itself never mind the country. oohhh and we have no ammunition to fire at anyone..We gave it the Ukrainians. Like I said... dont start me..
As an American, who served alongside UK forces in Afghanistan, I never saw a more motivated and under equipped force. I completely agree about SA80. It’s so sad to see the UK Navy so small and without what they need. On that note, we are facing some hard choices with our own Navy
The only thing wrong is having old service personnel who haven’t been at the coal face in decades making decisions on equipment. Also having out of date high ranking officers sign contracts that they have no commercial experience to understand. We waste billions in procurement from delays and no companies are ever penalised because of this.
No companies are penalised because, by the time equipment actually gets delivered, there have been so many changes to the original specification that the original contract is no longer valid. Overbudget and late delivery are as much about engineers continually chasing new requirements imposed upon them by MOD during development, as it is about manufacturing skills.
If you're going to have a home-grown defence industry, you need an export market to sustain it. A lesson that has been progressively unlearned since the days of TSR2. Once upon a time a contract bid meant that the agreed budget was the agreed budget and the delivery time was the delivery time, or penalty clauses would be invoked. Which idiot suggested that a contract wasn't binding?
When you have private firms automatically tak on 20% because it government. What can you do? It's the same across the country with council contracts. Then people wonder why the government shops abroad....
It is interesting pushing heavily for spiral development and referencing software development, when software development has been moving away from spiral to agile for decades.
4% of GDP, which is more than most of NATO contributes... The reason Trump was getting wound up is as most of NATO countries do not have there defence spending at the treaty obligated 4%.
Easy. Fire everyone involved so far, have negotiating ministers with realistic view of money, bring in accountability laws, and make defense procurement about production capacity rather than units made, with contracts covering the whole life of the project
No doubt union employees.
And stop buying everything from BAE. Every single thing they make is over budget and behind schedule.
@@RR-us2kpthe private company only cares for profit and dividends for shareholders uk defence is secondary
How to fix defense spending?
Stop buying every single thing from BAE. Everything they make is over budget and behind schedule.
Also make defense contractors accountable if they cannot deliver within budget and schedule, instead of shoving in more taxpayer money.
The biggest problem in all this is the completely incompetent Civil Service personnel at the MoD, they like to build empires that introduce long protracted and inefficient processes and they do not like change at all. The change needs to start there, get rid of the people who cannot do their jobs efficiently.
Speaker seems to be suffering from Mike Johnson syndrome. All the British army has to do is to go and ask Ukraine what THEY would spend our money on. I expect they would at least treble the size of the army and create a drone corps. They would buy 2000 old Bradleys from the US and get them working. This way, if we have to fight, we will at least have some people and basic equipment to do it with.
Don’t forget we built about 6,000 Abram’s and most are just in storage
Stop buying/building ludicrously expensive high-end assets that take ages to build and that can't be replaced if lost in a war.
Have multiple companies, it incentivises competition to make things better and hopefully cheaper, fire those suspected of corruption and bolster the budget
Dear God where does one start:
TSR2? Cancelled, then paid a fortune for not buying F111 ended up with slower Phantom because it had to have Rolls Royce Engines.
Nimrod AEW? Remember Cameron scrapping the lot!
Retiring the Hercules early and 40 Typhoons leaving what?
Selling the Harrier Force to the Yanks! wept that day
Chieftain - useless engine. Challenger three, called that because there are three of them!
SA80 total junk and cost the earth to fix..
Ajax (dont even start me)
Two aircraft carriers that have no aircraft (we have to borrow them off the yanks) cant protect themselves, spend more time being fixed than at sea. Escort ships retired as they have no sailors to man them.
Cost the earth, have no catapults and can only fly off choppers and F35s we cannot afford. Navy has more admirals than ships... Could be the problem there eh!
Never mind the fact that the entire British Army would not fill Wembley stadium following years of Tory hollowing out of the forces to the point the Navy couldnt defend the Serpentine, The Army cant ever field a full division and the RAF is now just a private flying club incapable of defending itself never mind the country.
oohhh and we have no ammunition to fire at anyone..We gave it the Ukrainians.
Like I said... dont start me..
As an American, who served alongside UK forces in Afghanistan, I never saw a more motivated and under equipped force. I completely agree about SA80. It’s so sad to see the UK Navy so small and without what they need.
On that note, we are facing some hard choices with our own Navy
The only thing wrong is having old service personnel who haven’t been at the coal face in decades making decisions on equipment. Also having out of date high ranking officers sign contracts that they have no commercial experience to understand. We waste billions in procurement from delays and no companies are ever penalised because of this.
No companies are penalised because, by the time equipment actually gets delivered, there have been so many changes to the original specification that the original contract is no longer valid. Overbudget and late delivery are as much about engineers continually chasing new requirements imposed upon them by MOD during development, as it is about manufacturing skills.
If you're going to have a home-grown defence industry, you need an export market to sustain it. A lesson that has been progressively unlearned since the days of TSR2.
Once upon a time a contract bid meant that the agreed budget was the agreed budget and the delivery time was the delivery time, or penalty clauses would be invoked. Which idiot suggested that a contract wasn't binding?
End the monopoly of BAE.
When you have private firms automatically tak on 20% because it government. What can you do? It's the same across the country with council contracts. Then people wonder why the government shops abroad....
It is interesting pushing heavily for spiral development and referencing software development, when software development has been moving away from spiral to agile for decades.
Taxes will have to go up to pay the country’s bills.
Scrap overseas aid. That's a waste of our money.
@@Trumpets4me if we just let russia take what they want then they'll be invading the uk in 30 years or so
Welcome to Tory Britain, sorry you just realised after 15 years of voting for them.
Defense has been consistent underfunded since the end of the Cold War. Labour and Tory have neglected it.
So much bull. Our army is easy to visual. Wembley full is the size of our army not front line troops remember.
Decades of micky mouse funding
This is true, however, the agencies have been cooking the books for years with huge bow waves.
4% of GDP, which is more than most of NATO contributes... The reason Trump was getting wound up is as most of NATO countries do not have there defence spending at the treaty obligated 4%.
No. Too late .
Get the Tories and there donors out of the defence percurment
It's currupt
*their.
The current approach comes from Tony Blair and McKinsey.