Defence Procurement White Paper

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Commentator, Feb 6, 2012.

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. A White Paper on the future of Defence Spending has said that in future the MoD's purchases will be decided on

    "open competition in the domestic and global market, buying off-the-shelf where appropriate".

    And that "We will look first for products that are proven".

    It goes on to say that "The MoD does not consider wider employment, industrial, or economic factors in its value for money assessments"

    So, is this an end to Defence R&D in the UK and a move to buying other nations ships, vehicles etc.. which have been proven already. An end to prototypes with "Made in Britain" stamped on them, or simple a bump in the road?

    Would this mean that companies like BAE ill go to the wall? Will the RAF try to order French jets instead of the Eurofighter like India?

    And will it matter to the Services where the kit is sourced from? Will we miss BAE's products, or just their waterproof ammo bags?

    Thoughts Arrsers?
  2. Stupid idea.
  3. Can the MoD use this idea retrospectively? If so, Westland - you owe us £2 Billion please.
    • Like Like x 1

  4. Is the Noble Lord suggesting that Wasteland re-inventing the Blackhawk wheel at huge expense with the Merlin was not the most gifted and far sighted of decisions of all time and gave the MOD a world class capability and the UK a fantastic export success at no huge expense to the taxpayer?

    I mean, look at what a flop that Blackhawk has been, its only sold 3,000 units compared with our fantastic Merlin thats stormed the market and sold <cough> not a lot Minister <cough>
  5. I wasnt on about Merlin but the Gazelle replacement. Now you mention it, Westland - you owe us a **** load more than a few billion.
    • Like Like x 1

  6. £26 Million squid teeny weenies? Bargain!
  7. Thoughts Arrsers?

    I recall reading about this in The Times last Thursday... Seems like the propagation of news down to the lower ranking media such as commercial radio is as slow as it ever was.

    Naturally the sacred three* will still be sourced in the UK.

    If it was up to me, the vast majority of our Equipment would be made only in Great Britain. We should be independant of foreign suppliers and net exporters of stuff that we use ourselves.

    *Sacred three; Nuclear, Communications and Crypography.
  8. But where will senior Civil Servants and about-to-be retired officers get a second career if we cast off (US)BAe and AgustaWestland??
  9. I always thought that MOD procurement needed to consider maintaining a manufacturing capability within the UK for certain defence items, such as ships, electronics, vehicles, ammo etc etc.
  10. It should do....right up to the point that those homegrown industries aren't competitive or offer value for money. That ceased about 30 years ago.

    As has been said, there are no wholly UK owned defence companies left any more. The profits (and IPR) feck off overseas. Most of our gifted designers jumped ship ages ago and work abroad. UK MoD buying a Westland product just means a few extra Armarni suits for some Wop in Rome. Its a bit late in the day to fly the 'Buy British' flag cos all that means is procuring a sub-standard expensive product designed to prop up a political stand point just for the sake of it. In this day and age, MoD procurement should be about value for money and maximum capability. Buying British is as out of date as the idea of National pride and the notion that we can still stand alone. If we'd properly maintained heavy industry it would be a worthwhile idea but since we've become a nation in love with leisure and retail, you can **** off. I want max bang for bucks and I'm not really fussed if it was designed in the back streets of Beijing.
  11. So who makes our ammo then?
  12. surely some mistake. Parts of the Nuclear Arsenal are bought from the United States
  13. Some of it may be bought from France.
  14. The politicians will not spend enough money on the armed forces to sustain any of the manufacturers. When something is ordered, it becomes subject to gerrymandering and delays in order to manipulate votes and government budget figures - which mainly why projects cost so fecking much. Ergo, we no longer have the option of buying British.

    E.g. If I was dictator, I would indeed be ordering 4 or 5 major naval ships per year - even if that meant putting older ships into a reserve fleet to save a bit on Navy running costs. At least those annual orders would keep strategic shipyards turning over at a commercially efficient pace. It probably would drive costs right down, as the yards would see a pipeline of new work to bid upon. The steel demand would make British steel mills a bit more viable - another strategic & economic benefit. The equipment in the supply chain would also benefit from the constant trickle down of orders. The bonus on top would be that, apart from UK retaining a strategic shipbuilding capability, a decent Navy and a few hundred thousand quality jobs - the surfeit of cheap(er) British equipment would be heck of a lot more competitive in the world's military hardware market.

    Repeat for armour, aircraft, small arms, ammunition, electronics, vehicles, trains, nuclear power stations, etc, etc..

    Simples; unless you're a socialist politician....

  15. So a bit like it used to be up until about 1950? ;-)