Thread by @FTusa284

@jeromestarkey @larisamlbrown @SheridanDani @bealejonathan @helenwarrell @thinkdefence
@UKDefJournal @JonHawkes275 @TotherChris @harry_lye @nicholadrummond
More to come re the Infrastructure and Projects Authority report on Ajax tomorrow, but a few thoughts from first data drop..

Basically, the IPA report shows utter incontinence as regards programme management across the piece. There isn't a, "oh, it failed here" - no: it has been systematic programme failure across the board. I will quote tomorrow from the IPA report to back this up...

One key conclusion is about "hand offs" - they are badly managed. Now, in ANY programme there are times when one manger hands something over to another - that's what happens. But the IPA Ajax report seems to suggest that for a number/a lot of "hands offs", that Ajax managers...

Have either played Hospital Passes, or have been playing IRA Pass the Parcel - no-one wants to be holding anything as they know it's going to blow up at some stage. This is NOT a good way to manage programmes, trust me...

To repeat: the IPA report states/confirms that a massive issue/problem with Ajax programme management is "The Conspiracy of Optimism": a feedback loop where when "Bad News" pokes up, "The System" works to make sure that anyone reporting this upwards is told to STFU....

And senior ranks are "happy" to pull the wool over politcians' eyes @benmoores2. And over at least 6-8yrs, maybe more, the information loop for Ajax has maximised stone walling over problems, ignoring the problems, and then indulging in self-deception.

We have had, what, 2, 3 @ArmyCGS either involved in the deception. Or lacking the curiosity to investigate. For Ajax, neither option is particularly complimentary. And, long term, this will damage the Army. BTW, other Services have their own skeletons which will bite them soon.

Anyway, to avoid the accusation of just throwing stones, "what would you do?". Well, here goes..:

1. The UK MoD procurement system has to become transparent. There are now far too many examples of programmes which have been managed "behind closed doors".

Ajax is one, Wedgetail another, as is Chinook ER, as well as JAGM. Basically - and I know some might regard this as heresy - UK Plc just cannot trust the Services to manage procurement.

With Ajax as the current, best "Poster Child" for behind-closed-doors procurement, why would you trust ANY of the Services to make good decisions? No: a bright shining ought has to be shone into Main Building and Abbeywood

2. The @CommonsPAC has GOT to mandate a new Major Projects Report. The MoD has tried to "capture the narrative" by saying that it isn't needed - the MPR is mandated by the Public Accounts Committee, NOT the MoD.

PLEASE @Meg_HillierMP seize the moment that Ajax mismanagement has given you, and resume mandating the MPR - the Services and the country need it.

The only reason that the MoD disliked the MPR, was that they had to provide evidence for their actions, and disliked that...

3. Possibly above and beyond a newly-regenerated MPR, there is a need for the UK equivalent of the US Operational Test and Evaluation, an independent body to assess how, in a technical sense, how programmes are going.

Now the US version is inside the Pentagon, but US law means that OT&E HAS to be independent, often fiercely so. Without legislation, putting such a body inside MoD would just see one hand washing the other. No, independence is what is needed.

BTW, all of this is going to be in the Services' interest - they just can't, and won't see it for the moment. But why not a mandated office under the control of @CommonsDefence and @CommonsPAC to do the work?

I'll end with a repetition: Ajax, and countless other current MoD programmes, are where they are because of endemic internal secrecy. Transparency is the only way to get out the current dire position. MoD/Services won't like it - but they caused this current situation.