Major projects discussed for '57 hours'

11 November 2010

Major defence projects were discussed by defence chiefs, civil servants and ministers for a total of 57 hours in the Strategic Defence and Security Review, according to Defence Secretary Liam Fox.

Speaking at a defence procurement conference in London, Fox said that he arranged meetings between "a minimum" of all service chiefs, senior civil servants and defence ministers so that all involved shared responsibility for the final decision.

"We all sat through something like 57 hours of discussions on the various projects we had, and the reason I did [arranged] that is because it was absolutely vital that we all signed up to the same thing. When we came out at the end we all had a share in it.

"One of the problems is that it has been too easy in the past for some of those who are key stakeholders in the process to say 'well, I wasn't fully consulted, I wasn't fully a part of it', and therefore be able to opt out. I wanted it so that when we came out everybody signed up to everything and I think to a great extent we've been able to do that."

Later at the same event, organised by The Spectator, First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope said he was "very uncomfortable" at the scrapping of the Nimrod MRA4 marine reconnaissance aircraft.

The Defence Secretary also announced that the Ministry of Defence's 16 biggest projects are to face quarterly reviews of their performance, with named personnel held to account for delays and cost overruns.

"What I don't like is the post mortem that the NAO (National Audit Office) carries out and says how badly the MoD has done in previous years," said Fox. "Perhaps it is my medical training but I would like to keep the patient alive rather than get to the post mortem period.

"What will now be happening is that the Big 16 - the MoD's 16 biggest contracts - will have a quarterly review.

"We will be looking at all the processes in there to see where we can get better management. We will want to know exactly what the costs are and what the times are, whether there's any kinks - overrunning of costs, overrunning of time. I want to know it on a regular basis, not when we get to the point which we had in recent years where we'd got an entire programme billions overspent and over time.

"We've got to start to bring the sort of management practice into MoD that would be taken for granted in industry.

"The idea that we ever allow ourselves into a position where something that was originally Nimrod 2000 - where we ordered 27 elements was reduced to nine, spent £3.8bn and we still weren't close to getting the capability - is not to happen again."

Asked if anyone was to be held to account for the Nimrod overspend and delay, Fox said: "One of the great mysteries I have found in the MoD is when you delve down and say 'who is responsible for taking which decision and which part of this process?' it is a very mysterious trail that goes off into the distance. And I want to ensure we have proper audit trails to make sure that when people are taking these decisions they are accountable to the taxpayer."