There are contrasting images of Nimrod the Hunter: the mighty king of the Old Testament,
and the less fearsome figure of Elmer Fudd. Through no fault of its own, the Nimrod spy plane, the most advanced and versatile aircraft of its type, seems destined to belong in the Fuddian
category.
Several senior officers have written to the Telegraph, urging the government to reconsider its decision to scrap the aircraft. They argue, not for the first time, that Britain’s defence capabilities are being pulverised by political calculations. (Con Coghlin adds his strategic concerns in the same paper.) The top brass have found an ally in Unite, some of whose members build and maintain the aircraft for a living. This unlikely alliance of donkey jackets and braid is wasting its time. Nimrod has downed its drink in the last chance saloon and staggered out on to the veranda. Even as I write, its wings are being dismembered.
To appreciate cost is to understand the problem. Nimrod’s latest upgrade arrived a decade late and finished well over-budget at £4bn – a common outcome where arcane procurement practice is concerned. A further £1.4bn would have to be spent on maintenance over the next decade. Therefore, the government and Chief of the Defence Staff believe that the public finances cannot withstand such a luxury – and most would agree, recalling the tragic consequences of underfunding the previous model.
To avoid past mistakes, the MoD has convened two reports into the uncompetitive procurement rackets that have left a £40bn hole in the MoD’s budget. Lord Levene and Lord Currie will examine the various intricacies of cost, competition and contract and report in due course. The ‘conspiracy of optmism’ is to be demolished. In future, hardware will not be ordered without close thought as to it where it might be applied; unaccountable senior officers and officials will be subordinate to politicians. The new practices should not relegate Britain from the international stage, but they will ensure that the best no longer costs quite so much.
In the meantime though, Britain will have been further diminished by the legacy of the previous government. Some are arguing that it is perverse to dismantle a symbol of national pride and flog it to Steptoe and Son. It isn’t perverse. On the contrary, it’s painfully apt.
Comments