Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Defence Procurement

Monday 13 March 2023 · 6 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 2 Partly answered 4 Not answered 0

Key points

  • The effectiveness of the defence procurement system is assessed as delivering most programmes on time and on budget.
  • The Ministry of Defence aims to use UK steel in defence procurement where possible.
  • The Ajax procurement programme is progressing, having passed user validation trials and moving to basic field trials.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Bill Esterson Lab Sefton Central
Defence
Context

The question arises from concerns over the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of defence procurement processes in ensuring timely delivery of military equipment.

Question

What assessment has been made of the effectiveness of the defence procurement system?

Answer from Ben Wallace

We are driving the delivery of capability in the frontline. Most of our programmes are delivering on time and on budget. For the second year in a row under my stewardship, the Ministry of Defence has set out an affordable 10-year equipment plan to ensure that our armed forces are being given what they need while living within their means.

Answered
Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q2 Bill Esterson Lab Sefton Central
Defence
Context

Concerns over the declining steel production in the UK, which is a vital sector for national security, especially with regards to procurement contracts.

Question

Defence procurement is essential to the success of a domestic steel industry. Given that the UK is currently the only country in the G20 where steel production is declining, and considering the importance of the steel industry to national security, will the Secretary of State ensure that we do not see a repetition of what happened with the fleet solid support contract, under which an overseas lead contractor had no obligation to use UK steel in the construction of UK Navy ships?

Answer from Ben Wallace

We always try to use as much UK steel as possible where we can, and when we do not, it is often because we do not manufacture the type of steel that needs to be used in a certain type of product. As for the fleet solid support ships, whether Navantia is part of the consortium or not, the hon. Gentleman should not listen to the union briefing. He will find that across the provision of those ships there will be plenty of British components—in fact, they will be in the majority—and the full integration of the ships will take place in a yard in Northern Ireland.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Specific assurance regarding future contracts prioritising UK steel was not given explicitly

How: The Hon. Gentleman Should Not Listen To The Union Briefing

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q3 Philip Dunne Con
Defence
Context

Concerns over delays and costs in the Ajax procurement programme, which is crucial for providing armoured vehicles to the British Army.

Question

Will the Secretary of State update the House on the status of the Ajax procurement programme? I understand that the supply chain is being geared up to produce 589 vehicles.

Answer from Ben Wallace

As my right hon. Friend will know, the Ajax was decided on in March 2010 under a Labour Government. Since I have taken over this office, we have sought to rectify the issue on almost a weekly basis. The vehicle has passed its user validation trials and is now undergoing its basic field trials. It is doing extremely well, and I am given a weekly update.

Answered
Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q4 Kevan Jones Lab
Defence
Context

Concerns over the inconsistent and short-term nature of project management roles within large-scale defence procurement projects, affecting long-term success.

Question

May I say first that if the Secretary of State is going to quote the National Audit Office, he should read the entire statement rather than doing so selectively? In large, multibillion-pound contracts in the private sector, a project lead with expertise is usually put in place for a number of years. In defence procurement, well-meaning and committed individuals with very little expertise in project management are there for a short period. Is it not time to look at the ways in which we project-manage these large multi-year contracts, and to move from what appears to some to be an amateur approach to a more professional one?

Answer from Ben Wallace

I do not disagree with some of the right hon. Gentleman's observations. Consistency in these programmes is incredibly important. Some of them, even when on track, can be 20-year programmes, and consistency is important. It is not just about the senior responsible owners by whom those programmes are led but he is right to suggest that we are seeking to see whether we can have more longer-term or permanent SROs.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Specific commitment to implement changes was not made, focusing instead on current practices and observations

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q5 Alec Shelbrooke Con Wetherby and Easingwold
Defence
Context

Concerns over the perception that the UK's defence procurement is a failure, despite successes in producing Type 26s, Type 31s, aircraft carriers, hunter-killer submarines and more under fixed prices.

Question

Would my right hon. Friend agree that defence procurement is a complex issue but not the total disaster that it is often presented as? When compared with the naval procurement of some of our closest allies—for example, the United States ended up spending $5 billion per destroyer in the Zumwalt class and the Canadians took over 30 years to procure a ship—the MOD produces Type 26s, Type 31s, aircraft carriers, hunter-killer submarines and more under a fixed price, showing that it tries to do its best in always tight financial circumstances.

Answer from Ben Wallace

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend who served with me in the Department. I miss his time in the Department. One of the biggest drivers of cost overruns is a decision by the Government of the day to defer decisions about whether they should cut or delete something. Deferring the aircraft carrier under the Labour Government cost £1 billion. Deferring the F-35 buy under this Government cost about £500 million.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Specific successes of UK procurement not directly acknowledged, instead focused on general observations and criticisms of deferrals

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q6 Chris Evans Labour (Co-op) Caerphilly
Defence Business & Trade
Context

SMEs face barriers in accessing Government defence contracts, with issues of slow payments and demotivation when projects are delayed. This situation has been persistent across various sectors.

Question

I join others welcoming the Deputy Speaker back. The innovation in the defence industry comes largely from SMEs but many report challenges in gaining access to Government contracts and being paid promptly when delays occur, leading to a poor experience with the Ministry of Defence. How will the Secretary of State ensure better access for SMEs to engage in the thriving British defence industry?

Answer from Ben Wallace

I acknowledge the challenges faced by SMEs in engaging with government procurement processes, including risk management issues. However, changes on the battlefield are opening up more opportunities for SMEs through initiatives like Operation Kindred in Ukraine. The ability to bypass normal regulations and procure directly from the marketplace has led to significant innovation and success among SMEs. For larger projects such as the global combat air programme or carrier alliance, we must ensure that mechanisms exist to force primes to include SMEs if necessary.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The specific ask about better access for SMEs was not directly addressed with concrete commitments on how this will be achieved.

How: Changes To The Battlefield Opening Up More Opportunities, Bypassing Normal Regulations

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)