Combat Aircraft programme £9.7 billion over budget
February 4, 2010 12:00 AM
By David Chappell in EADT
By David Chappell in EADT
Leon Stedman (EADT 30/1/10) is sadly mistaken if he thinks the British public will continue to accept that a rebuke to a civil servant brought about by a question from an MP constitutes bringing a civil servant to brook is sufficient to address mistakes made. The British public want an end to bonuses to civil servants and quango managers and for serious mistakes sacking should be an option we have in dealing with serious failures, and serious failures we have in abundance.
Mistakes that dwarf our contribution to the EU such as the F35 combat aircraft programme. This is a programme to provide a combat aircraft designed to operate of the new Supercarriers this country has planned. Originally budgeted at £69million per plane they are now forecast to cost £119M before a single operational aircraft has been delivered. The original budget would a have allowed for 150 aircraft, but at current costs that would mean an overspend of £7.5 billion! And that is just the purchase price not the operation or maintenance costs for an American aircraft that still has 'technical problems.'
When asked on this subject the Ministry of Defence have declined to comment as operational and technical issues have still to be resolved, with the US Government commenting that they expect operation and procurement costs in increase substantially. If the Government buys less of them then the Supercarriers will be half empty and unable to fulfil their operation role unless we fly American squadrons off our ships. What level of sovereignty will we have over our own aircraft carriers then? So we can't afford the planes to fly off these Carriers but are still designing and planning for them as though we could.
Together with the Supercarriers the forecast is currently of an overspend of £9.7 billion for just two defence projects. Meanwhile our soldiers on the front line in Afghanistan still feel the need to buy their own equipment! By comparison the money spent on the EU to promote trade, combat climate change, promote peace and stability across Europe is good value for money that sees a return in British jobs rather than American jobs.
Mr Stedman is right to say that MEP's do not issue questions to EU civil servants. There is no EU government to which such questions might be addressed. That is why there are less EU civil servants than in some British cities! MEP's question the Commission and the Committees.
But local overspending is just as much a concern. The 24 CCTV camera's in St Edmundsbury and Forest Heath Council areas have annual costs of over £530,000; while the 24 CCTV camera's ran by Sudbury and Hadleigh Town Council have an annual cost of just £18,000! Why? Do the Tories in St Edmundsbury think this is good value for money?
Do voters want an MP offering a wishy washy desire for change, or a campaigning MP who has no fear of losing his Ministerial post and will fight for the best deal for the voter?
What would you like to do next?
-
Subscribe for updates
Follow the party's activity on...
- Twitter:
- Liberal Democrats
- Facebook:
- Liberal Democrats
- YouTube:
- Liberal Democrats