Another MoD Procurement mess?

Discussion in 'Tanks, planes & ships' started by muhandis89, Mar 10, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. We'll give them as aid to somebody we don't like.
  2. Surely there must be one single respoinsible person who signed the final authority to go ahead with this purchase!

    Same as there must be a single person who authorised the contract for a £22 lightbulb and a £103 bolt!

    These people should be sacked, full stop!
  3. You can't sack the MoD Commercial gurus, they cast no shadows and walk abroad only at night.
  4. When I left University, my chosen career was procurement so I always read things like this with interest. To me it comes across as a cluster fcuk on the part of numerous interested parties. The specifier and The manufacturer (let's face it the manufacturer's experience should have lead them to ring the alarm bells), should be top of the list. Not sure how much involvement MOD Procurement have in drafting specifications, or if they just go out to tender based on a spec given to him.

    Mind you this is not the first fire engine farce, local fire authorities have also had their fingers burnt recently with buying combined pump/arial platform units that are too heavy to be used on british roads.
  5. To give you an insight into MoD procurement: The specification for Jersey Heavy Wool was the chest size in Centimeters and Inches. The MoD kept this even though the length of the jumper and the arms kept getting shorter and shorter. This meant introducing more sizes to cope with tall people, these sizes were more expensive because they were outside the original specifications!

    I love this from the Current Bun:
    Civil servants at the Department for International Development blew £50,000 on first-class train travel in just five months last year under Labour.
    This was cut to £58 for the five months after the Tories got in.
  6. LOL, obviously my commercial procurement experience would be far too sensible for them!.
  7. Actually the story is total and utter BS.

    If you read the MOD rebuttal from the MOD website, it certainly puts a different spin on things:

    "The Sun inaccurately reported that five specialist MOD fire trucks have sat idle for three years because they cannot carry enough water to meet regulations. In fact, these airfield tactical response trucks are more than able to carry the foam and water required. They carry sufficient water to meet the operating criteria set by the International Civil Aviation Organization for Cat 1A airfields. In addition, they were only delivered in 2010, so cannot have sat idle for three years, and have been used for training purposes since then.

    However, following an unrelated problem with the tyres on one fire vehicle, we have, as a safety precaution, temporarily withdrawn the fleet. We hope to have the vehicles back in service shortly once investigations are complete"
  8. Ord_Sgt

    Ord_Sgt RIP

    The lady doth protest too much, methinks. This might not be entirely true but it kind of fits in with the pattern of procurement disasters, so excuse me if I'm not sympathetic.
  9. OldSnowy

    OldSnowy LE Moderator Book Reviewer

    I wonder where that website got the story? Probably from the same people who sold the ficticious Lightbulbs story to the Scum.

    Sorry, but I've come to realise that if you believe half of anything you read in the Sun, you're probably ready to progress to the Daily Mail.

    I even have doubts about the Freddy Starr story - did he really eat the hamster???
  10. It's people like you that get my goat! Always relying on the truth and not getting blindly outraged like the rest of us! Now, what's this Daily Mail you're on about? Run by bloody immigrants no doubt.

    Wait for it ............. GRRRR

    (GRRRR is the new black.)
  11. Why would you want to join the MoD anyway as a Procurement or Commercial Officer if you were any good?
  12. Because you get to spend millions (which means you get very looked after by the sellers) and you don't even have to procure anything worthwhile!
  13. Folks, I know everyone wants a pop at the poor folks who call DE&S a home, but you've got to look at the system that permits that kind of behaviour to occur. The sheer bureaucracy of procuring kit means that in effect, any form of accountability can be shirked, sloped or even denied by individuals, because there is a process for everything, and as long as you follow that process, no matter how imbecilic you are, you cannot be blamed or called to account. Whilst I'm not for going the full way down the American route, perhaps if people were summoned in front of a house of commons acquisition oversight committee and roasted over some hot coals, maybe then would some element of house cleaning take place.

    I know lots of very well meaning hard working and conscientious people who work at DE&S, and they do not wake up in the morning with the mantra "today I'm really going to balls things up for the MOD". I won't deny reality - there are plenty of passengers/non-swimmers, however, the lack of rigour in the annual reporting system (as one example) denies us a very basic mechanism in sorting the place out.
  14. OldSnowy

    OldSnowy LE Moderator Book Reviewer

    The Daily Mail:

    A Banker, a Daily Mail reader and an immigrant sat down to eat. There were 12 biscuits between them.

    The banker took 11, and said to the Mail reader - look out, that immigrant is trying to steal your biscuit!

    Back to procurement - everyone comes in with great ideas, plans, and proposals (e.g. new head of Proc) but the fact that it is a) a Govt Dept, and b) entirely hemmed in by rules, mostly (D Mail hat on) from the EU - limits the flexibility to, really, zero. Plus, the MOD has to be honest and open.

    Contractors can - and do - act like crooks.