The inefficiencies of government management

[trousers]

Conservatives, Labour, Liberal Democrats. You names them.....all incapable of organising an army in a desert....as indeed they would a p1ss up in the proverbial brewery.

 

Say what you like about the source of the article below, but it highlights the fact that no matter how much money is pumped into the armed forces, and other public services come to that, it will inevitably be mis-managed somewhere down the line.....

 

No political judgement from me on this one other than to observe that they are "all as bad as each other"...

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/9126091/James-Blunt-Britains-failure-to-get-troops-into-battle-is-pitiful.html

 

James Blunt: Britain's failure to get troops into battle is pitiful

 

To understand why the troops might be demoralised, just try flying to Afghanistan with the RAF.

 

Properly prepared: James Blunt, pictured in Kosovo while he was in the Army, says the transportation

of our armed troops is inefficient and costly Photo: Rex Features

By James Blunt

 

8:53PM GMT 06 Mar 2012

410 Comments

 

I am, as I write, sitting nervously in an RAF Tristar circling over Dubai. The plane came into service in 1972, and is now about to go out of service, at 33,000 feet.

 

Our journey started 13 hours earlier at RAF Brize Norton. The Movements Officer was still on duty (it was 2am) to oversee our departure. We had been escorted across the orange-lit runway, past the old aircraft that I would later board, and led into a waiting room to find coffee, sandwiches and a brigadier reading in the corner. The more important cargo – about 100 soldiers – was in the hall next door. We were to accompany them as they deployed to Afghanistan. A memory from a past life flooded over me: I had been here, 13 years ago, en route to Kosovo.

 

Tonight, we would fly to Hanover to pick up more soldiers, before refuelling in Cyprus, then on to our final destination – Camp Bastion in Helmand province. As we took off on the last leg, from RAF Akrotiri, my keyboard player, sitting beside me, said cheerfully: “It looks like you’ll get there this time! Third time lucky, huh?”

 

I have attempted the trip with soldiers to Afghanistan twice before. We failed to get there each time. On the first occasion, we flew from London to Dubai, then sat on a runway for three days while they tried unsuccessfully to fix our broken aircraft. The soldiers were used to it, and in a way, they didn’t mind: it meant three fewer days being shot at. But the delay must have been wildly irritating for the men in Afghanistan who were waiting to be picked up and taken home to wives and girlfriends (and who, until recently, would see those lost days cut from their R&R allowance). And for the troops going into battle that day without their buddies stuck in Dubai, it must have been life-threatening. The Special Forces soldiers who were waiting with me actually went online to buy civilian flights to Afghanistan with their own money.

 

My second attempt was last Christmas. Due to heavy snow, our check-in had been moved from Brize Norton to East Midlands Airport, but boarding was delayed because of difficulties loading the packed meals. (Couldn’t the guys have been given them as they climbed the steps?) When we were eventually bussed across the apron, I saw an old charter plane in the distance and chuckled as I thought about the poor buggers who would end up on it. It was us. For seven hours. Of course, it didn’t work, so a replacement part was flown in, and we remained on board, as not enough buses were available to take us to the terminal. The crew had to stay on the aircraft, too, so by the time the part was fitted, they had done too many hours and the flight was cancelled. I was told it took those soldiers three days to get into theatre. They were paid during this time, and I’m sure they’re grateful. But I’m also sure it’s not how you and I want our tax money spent.

 

And now here I am, with more soldiers, failing once again to get to a war we have been fighting for 10 years. And although the military says more funds have been spent, I wonder if they have been spent in the right place. The soldiers may be better equipped, but a well-equipped soldier sitting in an airfield in the middle of nowhere isn’t going to scare the Taliban much. And you can ask entertainers to come and raise morale – or perhaps lower it, in my case – as much as you like, but if you can’t get those soldiers home on time to see their families, you’ve done the morale-lowering already.

 

The Tristar circles, more than six miles above the desert in the Middle East, and we learn from the loadmaster that this fine aircraft, bought second-hand from British Airways to get us to the Falklands War in 1982, has an air leak. The cabin has turned very cold and we’ve put on combat jackets and coats. Eventually, we have to fly the four hours back to Cyprus to land. The soldiers are led away for their overnight stay; this happens so often a hangar has been prepared as accommodation.

 

The next day we are shown to a different Tristar. It takes off, but develops a problem with the undercarriage. We fly out to sea to dump our fuel before returning to Cyprus. If I’m honest, I’m scared. I don’t need to be here. Maybe this is why I left the Army, to inflict my music on all of you. Blame the RAF. Right now, I blame Katherine Jenkins (she’s on the plane, too).

 

As we land in Cyprus again, I say I’ve had enough and book a flight home the next day. I leave behind a bunch of Great British soldiers, sitting on a runway beside two broken planes, and 200 soldiers in Camp Bastion, whiling away the hours, hoping the frustrations of their loved ones back home aren’t boiling over into anger. And as the few thousand soldiers still in Afghanistan advance to make contact with an enemy you and I will never meet – at a cost in life and limb to a brave few, and vast sums of money to the nation – I ask: what’s going wrong?

 

Why can’t we deliver people to the front line as required? Have we bought too many fast jets and not enough transport aircraft? Is it down to mismanagement of resources? Poor bureaucracy at the top? I don’t know. But I do know that our deployment of manpower is inefficient and costly (the fuel we dumped over the Mediterranean would be worth £55,000 at the pumps).

 

Every soldier, airman, NCO and officer that I met was professional, hard-working and keen. But every single one was also resigned. Resigned to the fact that someone, somewhere has constructed an expensive system that doesn’t deliver.

Either that, or they really didn’t want me to sing to them in Afghanistan.

Edited 7 March, 2012 by trousers

[buctootim]

This isnt a defence, but it is an observation. Public services are much more complicated than most private businesses. Businesses tend to have much narrower focusses. Some are airlines, some are airport operators, some are hotels, some are restaurants, some are logistics companies, tyre suppliers, plant operators etc etc. The private business has one area of expertise and a standard business delivery model which they stick too. Tescos dont decide to operate stores in Afghanistan at short notice, UPS dont have to deliver to countries where they have no infrastructure.

 

Generally businesses have a fixed model they work to. Public service has to create a new model each time because each patient, war and school child is different.

[trousers]

This isnt a defence, but it is an observation. Public services are much more complicated than most private businesses. Businesses tend to have much narrower focusses. Some are airlines, some are airport operators, some are hotels, some are restaurants, some are logistics companies, tyre suppliers, plant operators etc etc. The private business has one area of expertise and a standard business delivery model which they stick too. Tescos dont decide to operate stores in Afghanistan at short notice, UPS dont have to deliver to countries where they have no infrastructure.

 

Generally businesses have a fixed model they work to. Public service has to create a new model each time because each patient, war and school child is different.

 

Fair points. But isn't the observation being made here that, after 10+ years of a campaign, the MoD and/or Government(s) still haven't got it right? How long to they need to get a system in place for getting troops from A to B?

[badgerx16]

Fair points. But isn't the observation being made here that, after 10+ years of a campaign, the MoD and/or Government(s) still haven't got it right? How long to they need to get a system in place for getting troops from A to B?

 

Too many external vested interests and 'favours' needing to be returned ? After all, for every public sector contract that goes awry, there is generally a private sector supplier taking advantage, and quite often a Directorship offered to a retiring Minister.

 

The other problem with Public Sector systems and projects is that every 18 months or so, and after every change of Government, there are policy changes - if not direct reversals or overhauls, there are at least reviews and clarifications. You are trying to continually deliver to a nebulous specification, to satisfy the latest knee jerk reaction to a public opinion piece in the media.

 

All IMHO of course, being a public sector employee.

Edited 7 March, 2012 by badgerx16

[dvaughanwilliams]

The principle problem that I see for public services is the difficulty in defining success. In a private company it is easy to measure by turnover, net profit, profit margin, EBITDA or whatever. However, how do you measure success for the army?

 

Setting targets in the NHS lead to perverse behaviour in order to meet targets without necessarily improving the experience of patients. Like capping waiting lists resulting in people not being added to the list, but still waiting.

 

Equally, the most efficient use of money might be preventative. Spending a particular sum of money in benefits, say, might result in fewer people committing crimes, but it would be difficult to prove the correlation, let alone the causation of this.

 

So it is easier, politically, to spend the money on catching and locking up criminals, than preventing crimes. The first is measurable and the second is not. The problem is the second is better for society.

 

To answer your point about transport and logistics, the reason that money isn't being spent here is that it is expensive, but few voters care. The papers focused on soldiers having a lack of body armour and the vehicles used in combat, so this is where the money was spent. Overall, the government wants to reduce spending on defence, but this isn't easy. Probably the best way to do it would be to reduce the number of senior ranking officers, where we almost certainly have too many. I can't see this being suggested to ministers and it would be bitterly opposed by the people who stand to lose the most.

 

Defence procurement has a terrible reputation for poor negotiation. Think about the aircraft carrier that we are getting built because cancelling the contract would have cost more than building it then immediately scrapping it. There isn't much competition in the industry so the manufacturers get away with it. Also it would be very embarrassing for a government to get too much of the stuff built abroad by foreign firms, further reducing the number of potential suppliers.

 

However, for all the criticism of state run services, I would remind you that in health all of the countries with the best outcomes per £ spent are state run, especially when compared to the US which has worse life expectancy at a higher cost.

 

[derry]

Tri Stars and VC10s bloody near half a century old, no wonder they don't work too well. It's the useless antiquated equipment sacrificed on the back of the dogma of billions of misused overseas aid.

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

The trouble with the UK is that we're always asking our military to go the extra mile but we don't want to pay for it. Are the Yanks using decades old planes to carry their troops? Bet not.

Edited 7 March, 2012 by anothersaintinsouthsea

[pap]

Some legislation was recently proposed to give people a statement of where their tax money is going. We would expect a breakdown of any other large purchase, yet one of our biggest monthly outgoings disappears into a black hole with almost no accountability. Mental.

[Window Cleaner]

I read somewhere the other day that the Government (in this case the HMRC) were willing to forego about 20 million quid tax on

the sale of some old painting to a foreign investor so that it could be kept in some far flung Scottish gallery.So there's 28 million £ that could have been re-invested somewhere because the public purse will no doubt end up paying for the picture as well.

[Eddie Lizzard]

I wonder how long before someone saya "I remember when this was all fields"

[Thedelldays]

to be fair, this has nothing what so ever to do with the taxman

 

the MoD get X amount and spend it on Y....some of the admirals, generals and air marshals are fuking useless

[bridge too far]

I wonder how long before someone saya "I remember when this was all fields"

 

Joining together 'fields' and inappropriate use of public money, did anyone else see Monday's Panorama programme about 'farmers' who get huge subsidies and grants for 'farming' when they don't actually farm at all?

 

Millions of pounds go to those who already have millions (Duke of Westminster for one IIRC)

[Jonnyboy]

Afghanistan - what a waste of lives and money. Bring the troops home.