Why the MOD was arguably right to spend £1.1m on consultants for SDSR disposals.

Travelling on the tube today, Humphrey noted the story in the Evening Standard about 'MPs outrage' that the MOD had spent £1.1m on consultants since the SDSR to advise on disposals http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-24030047-mps-outraged-as-consultants-get-pound-11m-from-deal-to-axe-harriers.do

Notwithstanding the fact that the author is outraged just about every time he reads his MPs expenses claim forms, or hears verbatim just badly certain MPs behaved during trips to Operational Theatres (allegedly some very bad behaviour indeed (allegedly)), the question remains, do they have a point in being outraged?

Humphries emphatic answer is NO. Its very easy to get worked up when you read about consultants, they tend to be portrayed as the sort of slimy morally absent creatures who are more concerned with sneaking a glance at your watch prior to telling you the time and then billing you for the experience. The idea that public money is being used to get advice from them, particularly when something is being scrapped, is an easy way to win public outrage, get free headlines, and not really understand why the MOD is doing what is doing.

In this case, as Humphrey understands it, the MOD has  contracted the services of a highly specialised group of consultants to provide some bespoke advice on areas where the department had either no expertise, or needed external guidance. It stands to reason that if the department had the expertise in house, then it wouldn't have needed to bring the contractors in - but the reality is that the department doesn't have the expertise anymore. People don't understand how much in house experience has gone - a process arguably begun in 1994, and exacerbated through the 1998 SDR and beyond. This ties into the wider public / Daily Mail argument that anyone in government service is a parasite of the state, and therefore should be disposed (preferably with extreme violence).

The MOD is caught between two equally strong poles of outrage here - on the one hand people are angry that it is bringing in external consultants to advise on disposals. So the argument goes, this is a sign that the MOD has too much money, and is staffed by inept individuals who know not what they are doing. Yet at the same time, had MOD not divested itself of the experts, or had chosen not to bring in consultants, then the headlines would run that MOD was massively overstaffed by inept individuals who don't know how to get the best return on public money when disposing of kit, and why didn't they seek to get private sector involvement in the first place.

Right now MOD is trying to handle the twin challenges of downsizing its workforce - many of whom are tired, demoralised and in no mood to play nicely, and also downsize its equipment holdings. The skills needed to do this are either nonexistent, or the people who can do it are moving away as fast as they can. The MOD needs to recoup every penny possible from the disposal of assets to help solve the incredible financial spending legacy of the last Government (and having seen the figures, it is quite scary how big the problem was for the equipment programme). Humphrey believes it is better to spend money on getting some real specialists in, in order to help get the best possible return for the taxpayer, rather than making a false economy and not doing so, thus scoring cheap political short term brownie points, and long term damaging headlines.

More seriously, this indicates the way the department will have to go in future. Vast swathes of knowledge, often built up over decades of experience, are being lost forever. The rumoured additional 9000 cuts to the MOD CS will make this even worse. The public have to be brought around to the idea that less money means less knowledge, and this means when even relatively basic things need doing, the external consultants need to be brought in for assistance. Its not nice, its not politically popular, but if its the only way that the MOD will be able to do that which its political masters seek of it, then surely there is no other way?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

OP WILMOT - The Secret SBS Mission to Protect the QE2

Image
  In April 1973 the iconic Cunard cruise liner ‘Queen Elizabeth 2’ (QE2) steamed out of Southampton docks on a private chartered cruise. Her voyage would take her through the Mediterranean Sea to Israel to mark the 25 th anniversary of the founding of the Israeli state. The risks were high though, with an increase in terrorism around the world, particularly targeting Israelis, and there was considerable hostility from other regional states. There was a clear concern about the security of passengers onboard, which is why when the QE2 sailed, she was carry 29 heavily armed Royal Marine members of the Special Boat Section (SBS) as both overt and covert passengers onboard to deal with any threat. This is the story of that operation, known as OP WILMOT. UK MOD © Crown copyright The QE2 was chartered to sail on 15 April from Southampton with around 700 passengers onboard, many of whom were believed to be American. The plan for the cruise involve calls at Lisbon, call at the ports of A...
Read more

Is It Time To Close BRNC Dartmouth?

Image
The Royal Navy is on the verge of closing the prestigious naval training college at Dartmouth and merging training with ratings at HMS Raleigh. This would surely mean the end of the RN as we know it and is clearly an outrage. That basically sums up a recent tabloid story , which seemed surprisingly well informed, that suggested that the RN is considering merging training as part of the ongoing Defence Review. Once you get past the initial blood pressure raising ‘OUTRAGE’ that some clearly wanted to feel, its worth looking further at the idea and perhaps asking the question “surely this makes complete sense”? The MOD is one of the largest landowners in the UK, owning huge swathes of land from remote moorland training estate where live firing can be practised, to the Cape Wrath naval gunnery range off Northern Scotland – where only last week F35 aircraft from HMS PRINCE OF WALES dropped live bombs on Garvie island. It has enormous barrack sites, housing thousands of soldiers and dozens...
Read more

"Hands to Action Stations" Royal Navy 1983 Covert Submarine Operations Off Argentina...

Image
  It was 0830 local time on Friday 11 March 1983. Off the coast of Argentina, south of the Valdes peninsula the Argentine A69 patrol frigate GUERRICO was proceeding south at 17kts on a covert patrol, all her radars powered down, and operating under ‘EMCON silent’ procedure. Unknown to her ships company though, the GUERRICO was being stalked by the Royal Navy submarine HMS OSIRIS, closed up at action stations and tracking the warships every move as she conducted secret intelligence gathering patrols off the Argentine coast… In the aftermath of the Falklands War in 1982 the Royal Navy established an ongoing commitment to deploy submarines to the region to monitor Argentinean military activity, gather intelligence and provide a credible military deterrent to any renewed aggression. The war itself had proven the value of submarine operations, with both nuclear and conventional submarines deployed in roles ranging from special forces support, covert reconnaissance and intelligence gat...
Read more