		<div class="wpcnt">
			<div class="wpa">
				<span class="wpa-about">Advertisements</span>
				<div class="u top_amp">
							<amp-ad width="300" height="265"
		 type="pubmine"
		 data-siteid="111265417"
		 data-section="2">
		</amp-ad>
				</div>
			</div>
		</div><p><a href="http://londonglossy.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/mps-blast-mod-over-36bn-black-hole.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-full" title="David Cameron has blamed the previous government for leaving the £42 billion-a-year defence budget in a 'complete mess'" src="http://londonglossy.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/min-mps-blast-mod-over-36bn-black-hole.jpg" alt="David Cameron has blamed the previous government for leaving the £42 billion-a-year defence budget in a 'complete mess'"/></a></p>
<p>Ministry of Defence mandarins have been criticised by an influential group of MPs for failing to stop Labour ministers building up a £36 billion black hole in spending plans.</p>
<p>A &#8220;dangerous culture of optimism&#8221; at the department meant budget commitments were allowed to get out of control, according to the influential Public Accounts Committee (PAC).</p>
<p>The damning verdict came in a report into the way the MoD has managed its spending and estate over recent years.</p>
<p>David Cameron has blamed the previous government for leaving the £42 billion-a-year defence budget in a &#8220;complete mess&#8221;, forcing him into drastic cuts to balance the books.</p>
<p>The cross-party committee of MPs said there had been a failure to match future plans to a &#8220;realistic assessment of the resources available&#8221;.</p>
<p>It was &#8220;astonishing&#8221; that the department did not have a proper financial strategy that linked funding to its priorities, and when savings had to be made they were often &#8220;ad hoc&#8221; and actually increased costs in the longer term.</p>
<p>The committee highlighted the controversial contract for two huge aircraft carriers as a prime example. And it made clear it held the MoD&#8217;s accounting officer &#8211; which between 2005 and this autumn was permanent secretary Sir Bill Jeffrey &#8211; responsible for not heading off the problems.</p>
<p>&#8220;The Accounting Officer has not discharged his responsibility to ensure that planned and committed expenditure across the defence budget represents value for money,&#8221; the report said. &#8220;For example, in 2008 the department signed a contract to buy new aircraft carriers which was unaffordable, without having identified compensating savings. Because these savings were not subsequently found, it was necessary within a year to delay the project, resulting in an enormous cost increase and poor value for money.&#8221;</p>
<p>The committee concluded: &#8220;The department&#8217;s senior officials did not seek ministerial directions to proceed when they had major concerns about decisions threatening the value for money of defence spending.&#8221;</p>
<p>The MPs also raised questions about the MoD&#8217;s management of the defence estate, saying it was not even collecting information necessary to decide whether it was too large.</p>
			<div style="padding-bottom:15px;" class="wordads-tag" data-slot-type="belowpost">
				<div id="atatags-dynamic-belowpost-68ee5b4df30f5">
					<script type="text/javascript">
						window.getAdSnippetCallback = function () {
							if ( false === ( window.isWatlV1 ?? false ) ) {
								// Use Aditude scripts.
								window.tudeMappings = window.tudeMappings || [];
								window.tudeMappings.push( {
									divId: 'atatags-dynamic-belowpost-68ee5b4df30f5',
									format: 'belowpost',
								} );
							}
						}

						if ( document.readyState === 'loading' ) {
							document.addEventListener( 'DOMContentLoaded', window.getAdSnippetCallback );
						} else {
							window.getAdSnippetCallback();
						}
					</script>
				</div>
			</div>
Discover more from London Glossy Post
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
