← Back to House of Commons Debates
Armoured Cavalry Programme: Sheldon Review
15 June 2023
Lead MP
James Cartlidge
Debate Type
Ministerial Statement
Tags
DefenceForeign AffairsStandards & Ethics
Other Contributors: 14
At a Glance
James Cartlidge raised concerns about armoured cavalry programme: sheldon review in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Government Statement
The Minister James Cartlidge announced a review conducted by Clive Sheldon KC on the armoured cavalry programme, centred around Ajax vehicles. The Defence Secretary commissioned this independent review due to concerns about the troubled programme. Sheldon's report identifies systemic, cultural and institutional problems such as fragmented relationships, conflicting priorities and reticence in raising issues timely. While acknowledging these findings, the Minister noted that no evidence of misconduct or misleading information was found. They accept 24 recommendations with 15 accepted fully and nine conditionally. The report highlights improved governance, culture, and leadership for major programmes. Efforts to improve internal relationships, senior responsible owner roles (SROs), and transparency have been made. Significant progress in reducing procurement time and restarting Ajax training was noted. Minister expresses gratitude towards Sheldon's team and commits to applying lessons learned across MOD programmes.
Chris Evans
Lab Co-op
Caerphilly
Question
Chris Evans questioned whether any disciplinary action has been taken against those responsible for the Ajax programme's failures. He also asked about new procedures implemented to prevent similar issues on other major programmes and if there have been concerns raised with NATO about delays in meeting obligations.
Minister reply
The Minister stated that no evidence of misconduct or actions warranting disciplinary measures was found by Clive Sheldon KC’s report. While acknowledging the need for change, he did not provide specific details on new procedures implemented to prevent similar issues but committed to learning from the review and applying recommendations across MOD programmes.
Chris Evans
Lab Co-op
Caerphilly
Question
Evans raised concerns about Morpheus, questioning if its communication system issues are unfixable and what contingency plans exist. He also expressed a need for regular updates from the Government on such critical contracts.
Minister reply
The Minister did not provide specific details regarding the status of Morpheus's communication systems or any contingent plans but acknowledged the importance of transparency in handling taxpayer funds and ensuring soldier safety. He committed to applying lessons learned from the Ajax review across all major programmes.
Chris Evans
Lab Co-op
Caerphilly
Question
The MP paid tribute to Glenda Jackson and criticised the Conservative Government for Ajax's procurement failure. He highlighted the costs, delays, lack of accountability, and impact on workers in General Dynamics. He questioned whether disciplinary action had been taken against those responsible and what new procedures were put in place to prevent similar mistakes.
Minister reply
James Cartlidge agreed with Evans' tribute to Glenda Jackson and acknowledged his constituency interest. The Minister stated that no evidence of gross misconduct was found, so no disciplinary actions were taken. He highlighted significant investments such as £70 million over 10 years for Army procurement programmes and improvements in the number of SROs and time spent on major projects. Cartlidge also pointed out historical issues under previous Governments, indicating a commitment to delivering a fundamentally better acquisition system.
Tobias Ellwood
Con
Bournemouth East
Question
Ellwood welcomed the openness of the discussion and Clive Sheldon’s report. He highlighted Ajax's lengthy delays from initial introduction in 2010 to its expected service entry in 2030, noting it as a case study for poor procurement practices.
Minister reply
Cartlidge thanked Ellwood for his comments and agreed that the current vehicle being replaced is outdated. He emphasised meeting soldiers on the frontline and interacting with them for better acquisitions system delivery.
Martin Docherty
SNP
West Dunbartonshire
Question
Docherty expressed scepticism about the statement, citing examples such as Norway terminating its NH90 contract. He questioned why the MOD cannot do the same with Ajax and General Dynamics. He also asked if the Minister would be happy to supply these vehicles to a country like Ukraine.
Minister reply
Cartlidge acknowledged the complexity of procurement and highlighted that the Army is now training on the Ajax vehicle at Salisbury Plain, despite delays.
Mark Francois
Con
Rayleigh and Wickford
Question
The Ajax programme has been an absolute debacle, first initiated in 2010. Thirteen years and some £4 billion later, we still do not have a new armoured vehicle in frontline service. We will not have it until late 2025, and it will not be fully in service until 2030. This report starkly reveals in exquisite, agonising detail just how massively bureaucratic and broken the MOD’s procurement really is. With war under way in Ukraine, will the Minister assure the House that he is now genuinely personally committed to root-and-branch reform of how we buy military equipment in this country? The taxpayer and our armed forces deserve no less.
Minister reply
It is no exaggeration to say that no one in this Chamber has greater passion on the subject of procurement and acquisition reform than my right hon. Friend. I look forward to appearing before his Sub-Committee next week to discuss the important role of Defence Equipment and Support, on which, of course, so much of the report is focused. He is absolutely right: we need fundamentally to improve acquisition. A key reason for that is technology. We have to have a system that is faster, leaner and more agile so that we can respond more quickly to evolving technology.
Question
May I first express concern that there was in the Minister’s statement no estimate of the extra cost that will be incurred or of the capability gap? To echo the comments of others, the excellent workforce in Merthyr Tydfil are certainly not to blame in this debacle. Indeed, one of the issues highlighted in the report is that they were not listened to when they expressed concerns about the progress of the project. What I am unclear about is why, yet again, no one is to blame. It is probably because Ministers change so quickly that they can evade responsibility. Certainly, the system, and individuals’ roles in it, are to blame.
Minister reply
I have the greatest of respect for the right hon. Gentleman’s experience as a former Defence Minister. There are three points to address. In relation to the cost, it was a fixed-price contract. The point about the workforce is extremely important. As I said in responding to the shadow spokesperson, the hon. Member for Islwyn (Chris Evans), I am seized of that point. The defence sector is incredibly important to every single part of the United Kingdom, but particularly to Wales and in terms of General Dynamics UK.
Question
I welcome the sharp and cleansing light that the report will shine into the shambolic Ajax programme and, by extension, into the whole of the defence procurement programme, which has been a problem—we have been saying so for years. The report shines a light into it. I very much welcome the Minister’s commitment to listening to the lessons learned from the report and to change things fundamentally in wider procurement. In that context, will he let us know when the defence Command Paper is due out—it will presumably reflect some of those lessons—and, in particular, whether a defence industrial strategy will be published separately or alongside the Command Paper, and whether it will genuinely reflect the changes that he intends to make?
Minister reply
I am grateful to my hon. Friend. We are hoping to publish the Command Paper imminently, and it is certainly my hope that it will contain important statements on the issue of acquisition reform. For me, it is an absolute priority; obviously, I would say that as the Minister for Defence Procurement.
Richard Foord
Lib Dem
Honiton and Sidmouth
Question
I would like to build on the searching question from the right hon. Member for Warley (John Spellar). The Government announced in March that they would resume payments for Ajax towards the £5.5 billion cost. We had been expecting the CVR(T)––combat vehicle reconnaissance (tracked)—to be retired this year and for Warrior to be retired in 2025, but if Ajax is not to reach full operating capability until 2029 at the earliest, how will the capability gap be closed? If that is by extending Warrior, how much additional taxpayer’s money will be spent on extending the life of Warrior?
Minister reply
The hon. Gentleman asks a very good question. Obviously, it is important that the Army is satisfied with the capability it has, so that it can fulfil its key operational requirements. I am assured that that is the case. Inevitably, if there is delay in one capability coming forward, there will be some impact. We estimate that there is a cost of roughly £200 million to extend the life of Warrior and Challenger 2 in response to delay in this programme and the timescale in relation to Boxer coming forward.
Question
At its height, the Ajax project supported 850 jobs across Oakdale and Merthyr and a further 22 Welsh small and medium-sized enterprises. That is considerable investment in Wales and a void we cannot easily fill. Paragraph 7.8 of the Sheldon review details a number of examples of personnel feeling that there was not a “psychologically safe” environment in the MOD to raise concerns, as it would be “career limiting”, despite Joint Service Publication 492. This meant that “optimism bias” towards the project succeeding ran riot. How is the Minister going to change the culture, because that is not procedural?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend, who speaks with the expertise of a former Army officer and someone who serves on the Defence Committee, has hit the nail on the head in terms of the issue of optimism bias.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Question
I thank the Minister for his statement. This report makes for hard reading, and yet the humility with which he has accepted the critique is to be admired in these days of blame-shift. Mistakes were made; that is clear. It is also clear that transparency and efficiency go hand in hand. Will he confirm that the application of these lessons and new procedures will be armed forces-wide and that every officer stationed in Northern Ireland and Wales, and from the top of Scotland to the tip of England, will be made fully aware of the dangers of doing what has been done before and will embrace these changes for the better?
Minister reply
It is always a pleasure to receive questions from the hon. Gentleman; we always keep the best until last on the Opposition Benches, in my view. It is a matter of pride for me that I will be going to Northern Ireland to mark Armed Forces Week starting next Saturday, and I am looking forward to that immensely. I can confirm to him that I will not blame-shift; I will take responsibly.
Question
Notwithstanding the technical and procurement difficulties that have been reported, and the Sheldon review, which I welcome, Ajax has probably had more TLC than any British-made platform in history. Members may feel free to accuse me of optimism bias, but does the Minister agree that when it is finally rolled off the production line, it will be an excellent platform and fit for export?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend speaks with huge experience as a former senior Army officer, and he is absolutely right. I referred to visiting Bovington last Friday. For the soldiers there, Ajax is a step change from the vehicle from 1971, but there is another very serious point. They talked about the extra lethality of the cannon, the manoeuvrability and the amazing sensors in that machine, which gives them such huge oversight of the battlefield. It has great capability.
Richard Drax
Con
Mid Dorset and North Poole
Question
Commends the minister for his work and highlights a specific incident during a visit to General Dynamics where there were two sets of headphones available for civilian operators and military personnel, with civilians having better hearing protection. Emphasises the importance of attention to detail in ensuring such issues are avoided in future.
Minister reply
Acknowledges the MP's point about the need for attention to detail and explains that the vehicle's noise and vibration issues were partly due to its rigid body design following conflicts like Iraq and Afghanistan. Clarifies that while the initial headset used was not responsible for the problems, a second set of headsets was introduced later which proved effective in reducing noise and vibration issues.
Shadow Comment
Chris Evans
Shadow Comment
Chris Evans criticised the report as a 'damning indictment' of the programme's failure, costing £5.5 billion over 13 years and causing job insecurity in Wales. He questioned whether anyone has been held accountable for the failures and asked about new procedures to prevent similar mistakes on other programmes. Concerns were raised regarding NATO obligations and potential delays affecting military readiness. Evans highlighted workers' exclusion from decision-making processes, which led to issues not being adequately addressed. He also pointed out that 37 out of 39 defence contracts are marked red or amber by the National Audit Office, questioning if problems with Morpheus have been resolved and what contingency plans exist.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.