Why is our govt so stupid?

Kohoutek

dopester wrote: »

Didn't UK/Europe based companies win some major US military contract about 12 months ago (aeronautics). I recall there was some fury in the US.. same line as you're saying.. about jobs staying there ect. There was a big push being made to get the decision overturned but I didn't follow it up. Another $40 million military contract won by a UK company a few months ago.

I'm sure I could find many more. I think it's a pretty fair good system myself - just make sure what you're offering puts you in with a good chance of winning contracts, not relying on political interference cause 'jobs for British workers' loser syndrome.

I see what you mean and I think it's the best solution normally, but at the moment our economy is very vulnerable, especially in regions like the NE, where there is a huge amount of uncertainty, for example the mothballing of the Corus plant in Middlesborough. We really want to avoid job losses at all costs.

I'm sure the US defence sector will be OK, the US govt spends more on their military than the rest of the world combined, it still leaves a lot left over even if foreign companies win some contracts.

I just think we're at a time where protecting British jobs is crucial, especially in places like the North East. The government recently paid GM £270 million to keep production going in the UK when they were about to make significant job losses, that's no different in principle than awarding a military contract to a British company to preserve jobs, even if it isn't the cheapest.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

Pete111 wrote: »

From the ASCOD wiki article link above

....{it}performed well in a Norwegian vehicles trial, although it ultimately lost to the Swedish CV90.

So the link you posted appears to show it is inferior to the one we passed on..

Doh!?!

I think that comment refers to armament & the 30mm cannon it has.

The Pizarro mounts a 30 mm Mauser cannon in a fully traversable electro-mechanical turret. The 30 mm cannon, stabilized on two planes, is able to fire on the move at a rate of up to 800 rounds per minute. It also carries a 7.62 mm machine gun as a secondary armament, carrying up to 205 rounds for the 30 mm gun and 700 for the 7.62 mm machine gun. This armament is comparable to that of the M2 Bradley and the CV90, and performed well in a Norwegian vehicles trial, although it ultimately lost to the Swedish CV90. The gun uses the Mk-10 fire control system from

If you read it in context it kind of put a whole different slant on what you quoted.......


Exports can have 40mm cannon...

1984ReturnsForReal_2

StevieJ wrote: »

It's OK Brownie will be along in minute to reverse the decision if it means a few more votes.

Didn't he do that with the Carriers? :rotfl:

Kohoutek

StevieJ wrote: »

It's OK Brownie will be along in minute to reverse the decision if it means a few more votes.

Well I would prefer that, even if it was for cynical political reasons. One thing we do not want during a fragile recovery is even more job losses, and Newcastle is a Labour heartland so maybe they owe it to them!

1984ReturnsForReal_2

Kohoutek wrote: »

OK, to use strict English they're part of the state not the government. They're not contractors, and their wages are paid by the state. The Ministry of Defence is a department of state.

How is procurement a political decision? It's an administrative decision, and it's very unfortunate that supporting the British economy and British workers can't be a consideration.

There's nothing in this article or others to suggest that better performance was a consideration, it was purely on a cost basis.

I know what you are saying Kohoutek but there is a lot more to it that an article written by some journalist that didn't even get the name right...

Kohoutek

If the government wanted to save money, they could outsource a lot more than a defence contract. Why not outsource clerical positions in the civil services roles to India? Why not automate the NHS booking system? It would save a lot of money, but like this it would cost a lot of jobs.

There has to be a balance between efficiency savings through outsourcing and not gutting our economy of jobs.

Conrad

This happened all the time under the torries too with police cars (not rovers), arms and many other things. It's the opposite of what the French have always done.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

General Dynamics claims that the contract will safeguard or create 10,500 jobs in the UK.
The contract is reported to be worth £4bn ($6bn).
General Dynamics said its product was not only the best option, but was a patriotic choice too.
"The programme is British to its bootstraps, delivering a military off-the-shelf vehicle with British design by British engineers to the British Army," said Sandy Wilson, president and managing director of General Dynamics.
Welsh secretary Peter Hain said the deal would see 200 new jobs created at the company's plant in Newbridge, south Wales.
A further 250 existing jobs will also be safeguarded at the plant, he said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8580266.stm

Kohoutek

Wow, that's some pretty inaccurate/misleading reporting from the Times if that is true.

JonnyBravo

British down to it's bootstraps except the body of the tank will be made in Spain.

Oh and the BAE bodies are made in Sweden anyhow.


They are both global corporations in reality.