Senior Ministry of Defence officials have admitted that a significant share of major defence programmes are running into trouble, with too many projects falling behind schedule.
Giving evidence to the Defence Committee, National Armaments Director Rupert Pearce described the overall picture bluntly, saying the portfolio is “pretty troubled” and that “there’s too much red”. He added that the proportion of programmes in difficulty has crept up over time to “just over 20% pushing 25% now – it’s too high”.
While most projects are still formally on track, the direction of travel is a concern, the central issue is persistent delays. Pearce told MPs that “most of those programmes are not over budget. They’re delayed”, with delivery dates repeatedly slipping.
That distinction matters as even where costs appear contained, delays can erode capability, disrupt planning and drive further expense over time.
Evidence pointed to a mix of underlying causes as many programmes involve advanced or unproven technology, bringing what Pearce called “a big technology risk quotient”. Supply chain pressures remain a factor, and several projects depend on multiple international partners, adding further complexity. Taken together, he said, “it’s just a very, very complex situation to manage”.
The Wedgetail airborne early warning aircraft was cited as a clear example, the UK had expected to field a largely mature system based on Australia’s platform, but that assumption has not held. Pearce said the gap between the Australian aircraft and the UK build meant “a much higher level of obsolescence”, requiring new components to be certified and causing “very significant delays”. He also acknowledged that Boeing has been “a troubled partner”, reflecting well-documented issues in its wider aircraft programmes.
MPs also raised concerns about oversight, particularly as more programmes are being withheld from public reporting on national security grounds. Pearce said this was not a discretionary decision but based on “a set of objective criteria”, and offered to discuss specific cases in private.
More broadly, the discussion exposed the extent to which programme performance is tied to wider uncertainty inside the department. Several projects are linked to decisions still to be set out in the delayed Defence Investment Plan, leaving questions over funding and priorities unresolved.
Pearce made clear what success would look like: “I want to see red turning to amber and then to green.” The difficulty is that, for now, too many programmes remain stuck in the red.
We don’t hear much about the Army’s new vehicles such as Boxer, I guess we have as many as ten right now? That blasted Wedgetail is Nimrod upgraded all over again, and look what Cameron did to that! Just as supply issues were being addressed on Boxer and CH3, along comes the Iran War, which could place even more restrictions on manufacturing and supply.
The RN is not in the best of shape either, as its brand-new warships are moving at a snail’s pace from the builder’s yards, and the existing fleet is falling apart due to overwork, and painfully slow maintenance periods are restricting operational readiness. Note the international reaction to the HMS Dragon debacle.
Alarmingly, the UK is being drawn into the possibility of being at war on two fronts, Ukraine and the Middle East (especially if Trump steps back from his current commitments to Ukraine), and both the Army and Navy are to be found wanting, all due to reckless management by fourteen years of Tory policy and Starmer’s sloppy Ministry of Defence and its inability to even publish the DIP. Sadly, washing down and repainting sixty-year-old Bulldogs and tired-out Warriors may sound alarming, but that’s all we have, folks…so sleep well.
That statement tells you next to nothing, stuff delayed but in budget? Things delayed by the delayed DIP, and every thing else a secret to stop embarassment.