Title

Is management of the defence budget becoming indefensible? And by this, we don't mean white elephant aircraft carriers lacking aircraft and state-of-the-art nuclear subs running aground in Scottish waters. Frontline cuts are far simpler to manage than back-office culls. But greater savings can be made from the latter. KPMG estimates 60% of local government costs are in support functions, compared with 40% in core frontline service delivery. So, ahead of the strategic defence review, commentators observed Israel's £9bn a year defence spend was managed by 900 staff, while our dear own Ministry of Defence (MoD) employed an army of 23,700 civilian staff overseeing a £10bn procurement budget. Incidentally, this figure comes close to planned 25,00 MoD staff redundancies, which outnumber the 17,000 armed forces losses. The writer, Oscar Wilde, defined a cynic as a man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. Defence officials seemingly fall into the opposite trap – appreciating the strategic worth of all they do, but blind as to what it actually costs. Before being redrafted into the military procurement ranks, defence efficiency saviour, Lord Levene, hit on what he thought was a winning ruse. The idea would display a degree of transparency that even Cabinet Office minister, France Maude, and communities secretary, Eric Pickles, could both agree on. Attached to each and every piece of defence kit would be a price tag. So, a squaddie repairing a beached armoured truck on Salisbury Plain would know the MoD valued the generic piece of metal he was hammering at £600. Outraged at this waste of money, he'd either encourage his superiors to secure better value for taxpayer's money or call a tabloid newsdesk. The defence industry cried foul, complaining it was unfair to put a price on a widget and the MoD, at the time concurred. Better luck next time, Lord Levene? Jonathan Werran is editor of Governetz Public Property

Title

WHITEHALL

Inside View

SUBSCRIBE TO CONTINUE READING