back to article MoD splashes £1.5bn on 10-year IT deal to 'keep pace with threats'

The Ministry of Defence has inked a ten-year deal worth £1.5bn with HP, Fujitsu, Airbus and CGI for IT and comms. The department estimates the mega contract will save £1bn over that period. However, the MoD is not known for having the best track record in delivering cost-efficient IT programmes. For example, the …

  1. adnim Silver badge


    1.5b to save 1b... How does that work?

    I have obviously missed something and will be down voted for my ignorance

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Spending

      Yes, it's a £500M contract.

      The consortium were going to over-charge £2B, taking it to a £2.5B contract.

      The MoD beat them down to only over-charging £1B, taking it to a £1.5B contract

      See? £1B in savings.

      1. Little Mouse

        Re: Spending

        Don't forget that the MOD will be "...shifting users to the cloud...".

        Virtualizing your fleshy workforce could result in savings. They'll need fewer chairs for a start.

        1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

          Re: Spending

          "...shifting users to the cloud...".

          The RAF are obviously jealous of the Royal Navy getting aircraft carriers (albeit without any aircraft)

          So they are building that floating airfield from Captain Scarlet - "in the clouds"

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    That'll be the upgrade to Windows 7 finally starting then.

  3. tony2heads

    What baffles me is

    Why the MoD need 180000 licences.

    Do the really have that many people in desk job, as opposed to - maybe - having a defence force?

    1. Blane Bramble

      Re: What baffles me is

      The Armed Forces employs approximately 180,000 people funnily enough.

      Microsoft licenses are not concurrent. You have to license everyone who needs access.

      Possibly all serving soldiers need a license to access DII

      1. phil dude

        Re: What baffles me is

        I want to lobby El Reg for an icon with a penguin wearing a WTF? T-shirt, slapping its forehead...

        Money Spending Method 4 expected result. "Spending someone else's money on someone else" - who cares?


    2. Bob Wheeler

      Re: What baffles me is

      I suspect the sad truth is yes, it does have that number of civil service types to suport the folks at the sharp end. Around 1:1 ratio

    3. SkippyBing Silver badge

      Re: What baffles me is

      You need access to the network to see your pay and administration workflow and send emails asking WTF is going on. To access the network you need to use a computer via a unique log-on. Ergo everyone needs a licence.

      Although to be fair the Army didn't used to trust its junior ranks to even look at their pay and admin details online so there's probably a saving to be had there.

      1. Bumpy Cat

        Re: What baffles me is

        All military personnel now use DII. Annual reports, pay, expense claims, and personal details are all accessed and managed through your DII login. If you include everyone in all three services and the reserve equivalents, that's around 200k people.

    4. John Smith 19 Gold badge

      Why the MoD need 180000 licences.

      23 000 in Procurement (in Bristol) here, 10 000 for something else somewhere else.

      Pretty soon you're talking serious numbers of staff.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Why the MoD need 180000 licences.

        "23 000 in Procurement"

        Twenty three fucking thousand useless arses in procurement? Defence procurement spend is about £17bn a year, so they're hitting the heady heights of about £3,500 per employee per working day.

        My wife can spend money faster and more effectively than these clowns.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    For example, the deliverability of its £7.3bn, 14-year defence IT programme due to be complete this year, was marked as "high risk" by the Major Projects Authority.

    I saw the beginnings of Atlas as a contractor to a failed bidder and then brought in as one of a group of organisations deemed necessary for a successful bid from EDS to deliver. The whole thing was a mess. MoD didn't understand what they were asking for - and wrote specs that defied analysis, EDS took advantage of that, and contractors by the bucketful were in on day 1 working on relatively low level; functionality - without any decent view of the systems architecture, migration, security and actual operational requirements (believe me, a destroyers IT requirements do not fit with your standard SLA that seems more in tune with a (promised) BT home supply).

    A mess from day 1. Failures by MOD, the senior managers within the winning consortium (who cynically began to manipulate the contract KPIs from day 1) and government. The fact that stuff got delivered was at least in part due to very hard work by the lower tier. I remember the adage, design top down, implement bottom up. Atlas was implemented bottom up all right, but it was bottom up implementation that forced the top down design.

    Not pissed off at my tax money being wasted or anything you understand....

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Not pissed off at my tax money being wasted or anything you understand....

      At least they made savings by axing Nimrod MRA4. A pity that was after wasting £4bn on it, and then finding (amazingly) that we had no fucking maritime patrol aircraft when the Ruskies came sniffing round the Clyde.

      And now we have that complete arsehole Michael Fallon telling us that he's extending a Tornado squadron's service life by a year, so as to rile IS (and increase the nominal terrorist threat to the UK), but he's completely incapable of saying "yes" when directly asked if this extension is due to the fact that successive governments have fucked up and left the RAF with no strike capability other than the antique Tornado, or the Typhoon with bombs sellotaped to its wings.

      Defence ministers: Regardless of their party, what a bunch of unmitigated c*nts.

  5. John Crisp

    Ah so this is why why the useless fuckers can't supply my son (a sapper) with decent kit meaning he has to resort to buying his own if he wants something that's any good.

    Might possibly be the best trained soldiers, but that's no good with piss poor kit.

    And having dealt with Bristol I can confirm they are a useless bunch of pricks who were probably unemployable elsewhere.

    Best place to start cuts is in the MoD civil servants.

    Goat well and truly gotten

  6. Mr Dogshit

    Yeah whatever

    Since when is "to ink" a verb? Outside the US that is.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019