The Ministry of Defence have announced the signing of a £150m, five year Logistics Support Contract with Babcock International Group.
The MoD say in a news release that this contract considerably cuts costs for the Army, saving in the region of £50 million on the previous contract and will deliver essential replacement parts to soldiers in a fraction of the time they would have previously expected.
Sorry, but the very first rather large paragraph, in italics, has just frazzled my brain. A perfect example of business speak, whereby the person writing it makes a best effort at A, trying to be smart, and B, hide a cut/reduction/reduced capability with utter shite and buzzwords. Imagine trying to send that crap using BATCO!!!!!!!
BB85
3 years ago
I’ve never read so much shite in a short number if paragraphs in my life. How to talk utter bollocks in the most amount of words possible without actually explaining what this £150m contract will deliver. I see the idiots at the top haven’t been replaced following the strategic defense review if they have just signed over £150m without having a clue what the contractor will actually deliver.
Babcock is a private company. It’s simple replacing the old logistics contract. It will save the Army 50M quid, and get kit to the frontline faster. Not evething is to hide cuts or has an alternative motive behind it. The defence review was a well written document that addresses the modern world, not how to re-fight old conflicts.
Geoffrey Roach
3 years ago
Gentlemen…you should know by now that this is the art of gobble le speak, a new English that has been thrust upon us in modern times to make folk look clever. When I went to school my English masters litany was “keep it short, use full stops”
BB85
3 years ago
I only see press releases like this from the pubic sector. There is nothing intelligent about any of it. If anyone delivered a sales pitch or program update like this in the private sector they would be ushered out the door.
RobW
3 years ago
So it’s a stock management system for £150m. I have clients who supply the MOD and their stock/inventory systems are a joke. My client has the exclusive UK distribution rights for a number of items the army needs to repair its trucks. But the MOD refused my client’s tender due to a few paperwork errors and now buys them from a competitor, who has to go to my client to get them. Adds about 40% to the cost, around £500k pa just on a few product lines. Utterly daft. Let’s hope this £150m is money well spent and they sort… Read more »
If the MOD rules allowed sourcing from small engineering firms costs would go down. Really the Government should buy an engineering company to make stuff as there is no profit and long lead times in ordering small numbers of parts as lean management systems now require. Also putting out to tender each time can lead to lower quality and parts not made correctly to drawings, this is found out when its time to fit the part as old quality inspections are deemed old fashioned!
“and will deliver essential replacement parts to soldiers in a fraction of the time they would have previously expected.”
Let’s hope so!
“New Army special operations Ranger Regiment to take on ‘high threat’ missions overseas after Integrated Review. The Special Operations Brigade, known as the Ranger Regiment, will carry out missions traditionally taken on by the SAS and SBS”.
What sort of spare parts do soldiers need? Arms, legs, eyeballs, testicles etc!
Nigel Collins
3 years ago
08.57 Today.
“Defence review The defence secretary has refused to comment on reports that the army will be slashed by 10,000 troops. Mr Wallace said the aim was to ensure the UK military was “the right size” to meet the threat faced.”
Not sure why he was asked on to the Marr show as he clearly couldn’t talk about the cuts before they are announced to Parliament. Re the new cable security vessel, I envisioned something like the Attenborough, however the operational crew is something like 15. Will it be a reworked mine-hunter?
Paul42
3 years ago
I wonder how much cheaper this would be if actually done in house? It seems to suggest our armed forces have serious deficiencies in places and are reliant on contractors…..
Sorry, but the very first rather large paragraph, in italics, has just frazzled my brain. A perfect example of business speak, whereby the person writing it makes a best effort at A, trying to be smart, and B, hide a cut/reduction/reduced capability with utter shite and buzzwords. Imagine trying to send that crap using BATCO!!!!!!!
I’ve never read so much shite in a short number if paragraphs in my life. How to talk utter bollocks in the most amount of words possible without actually explaining what this £150m contract will deliver.
I see the idiots at the top haven’t been replaced following the strategic defense review if they have just signed over £150m without having a clue what the contractor will actually deliver.
Babcock is a private company. It’s simple replacing the old logistics contract. It will save the Army 50M quid, and get kit to the frontline faster. Not evething is to hide cuts or has an alternative motive behind it. The defence review was a well written document that addresses the modern world, not how to re-fight old conflicts.
Gentlemen…you should know by now that this is the art of gobble le speak, a new English that has been thrust upon us in modern times to make folk look clever. When I went to school my English masters litany was “keep it short, use full stops”
I only see press releases like this from the pubic sector. There is nothing intelligent about any of it. If anyone delivered a sales pitch or program update like this in the private sector they would be ushered out the door.
So it’s a stock management system for £150m. I have clients who supply the MOD and their stock/inventory systems are a joke. My client has the exclusive UK distribution rights for a number of items the army needs to repair its trucks. But the MOD refused my client’s tender due to a few paperwork errors and now buys them from a competitor, who has to go to my client to get them. Adds about 40% to the cost, around £500k pa just on a few product lines. Utterly daft. Let’s hope this £150m is money well spent and they sort… Read more »
If the MOD rules allowed sourcing from small engineering firms costs would go down. Really the Government should buy an engineering company to make stuff as there is no profit and long lead times in ordering small numbers of parts as lean management systems now require. Also putting out to tender each time can lead to lower quality and parts not made correctly to drawings, this is found out when its time to fit the part as old quality inspections are deemed old fashioned!
Is that what is required these days from a two star general, the ability to talk utter ballocks?
“and will deliver essential replacement parts to soldiers in a fraction of the time they would have previously expected.”
Let’s hope so!
“New Army special operations Ranger Regiment to take on ‘high threat’ missions overseas after Integrated Review.
The Special Operations Brigade, known as the Ranger Regiment, will carry out missions traditionally taken on by the SAS and SBS”.
https://news.sky.com/story/ew-army-special-operations-ranger-regiment-to-take-on-high-threat-missions-overseas-after-integrated-review-12251093
What sort of spare parts do soldiers need? Arms, legs, eyeballs, testicles etc!
08.57 Today.
“Defence review
The defence secretary has refused to comment on reports that the army will be slashed by 10,000 troops.
Mr Wallace said the aim was to ensure the UK military was “the right size” to meet the threat faced.”
Not sure why he was asked on to the Marr show as he clearly couldn’t talk about the cuts before they are announced to Parliament. Re the new cable security vessel, I envisioned something like the Attenborough, however the operational crew is something like 15. Will it be a reworked mine-hunter?
I wonder how much cheaper this would be if actually done in house? It seems to suggest our armed forces have serious deficiencies in places and are reliant on contractors…..
Utter cobblers. They need a dose of
http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/