The government has yet to set out when its promised acceleration of defence procurement will be achieved, as a written parliamentary exchange shows the department still has no defined timetable for meeting the contracting speed targets outlined in recent policy.
Ben Obese Jecty, the Conservative MP for Huntingdon, asked the department “by when is his target to reduce the average times to contract for (a) major projects of six years, (b) pace-setting modular upgrades to two years and one year respectively and (c) a target of three-month cycles for rapid commercial exploitation.”
The question sought clarity on when the MOD expects to reach the accelerated acquisition benchmarks it has set out in recent defence policy.
Responding for the department, Minister of State Luke Pollard said that reducing delivery timelines remains central to procurement reform efforts. He stated in the written reply that “reducing the time taken to deliver capability is a key driver of our acquisition reforms.” Pollard said the MOD is introducing a “segmented approach to procurement, supported by accelerated commercial pathways,” which is intended to help programmes reach contract more quickly.
However, the answer makes clear that the department has not fixed dates for achieving the specific reductions cited in the question. Pollard wrote that “no timescale for achieving the targets has been set,” signalling that the MOD is not yet committing to when the one year, two year or three month cycles might be reached.
The only formal milestone referenced in the reply is the establishment of the new segmented approach itself. Pollard said the department is progressing toward “the target date of 1 April 2026 for establishment of the segmented approach in line with the Strategic Defence Review.” According to the answer, this will begin with pilot projects intended to identify early opportunities for improvement.
While the MOD continues to present accelerated procurement as a priority, the implementation remains tied to structural reforms rather than clear delivery timelines for the targets described in policy statements.
Britain lacks politicians who actually give a crap about defence*
Fixed the title.
Pretty much.
They’re only interested in supplying pork to the MIC, with jobs as part of that contributing to their “plan for change” and “boost growth” which is being strangled by their own policies.
Have a look on youtube at Gordon Brown ranting about change.
Nothing has changed.
No time line so, next year, 5 years, or decades. Who cares, it’ll be someone else’s problem then.
They’re going to get a wake up call when ruzzia keeps upping attacks on Europe. I’d hate to be a high ranking officer in the British military. Must be very hard trying to get things done with hands tied behind your back and money getting thrown up against the wall.
Very, very frustrating. We have a good defence industry and we have the best trained military personel in the world. Our biggest weakness is the lack of political will and wasteful spending. Good lord the MoD wastes money.
What a load of fantastically written bullshit.
Sad reality? It will take a direct, massive hit on the UK before these lazy, useless politicians do anything. Only when a population feels pain do they demand swift action. So, its an attack on critical infrastructure that will cause mayhem that kick starts change. Social tensions are already bubbling in the UK. And Pooters knows that.
It’s all lies. They’re not going to acquire anything; their only interest is reducing military capabilities and saving and saving to squander on useless things.
Waffle.
Has this wretched government placed any orders for significant platforms in their 16 months in office? So many senior officers and quite a few leading politicians in government seem to accept that we are in a pre-war situation.
I agree with John that only a significant Russian kinetic attack on a UK base, military platform, critical national infrastructure or even a town will wake up the population-at-large and the Prime Minister. By then it will be far too late to rearm – we had nearly 5 years of rearmament to get ready for WW2 – we will probably not have 5 months next time around.