1-20 of 217 results for subject:Procurement
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.31 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.012 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Procurement
- We searched for
- subject_t:Procurement OR subject_t:"Procurement and PFI" OR subject_t:"Purchasing policy" OR subject_ses:92609
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
Primary member
More
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to hasten the delivery of F-35 Lightning jets.
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to hasten the delivery of F-35 Lightning jets.
The Defence Investment Plan outcome will inform any update to F-35 procurement timelines.
To ask His Majesty's Government when they expect to have taken delivery of 74 F-35 Lightning jets.
To ask His Majesty's Government when they expect to have taken delivery of 74 F-35 Lightning jets.
The Department expects to take delivery of its 75th F-35 aircraft by the end of 2033.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to increase the number of operational Royal Navy warships in this financial year.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to increase the number of operational Royal Navy warships in this financial year.
Currently the Royal Navy has 52 Surface Ships in service, held at the appropriate level of readiness to meet operational commitments.
The Royal Navy continues to modernise its Fleet through careful management of a surface fleet transition plan to ensure the highest priority outputs are maintained through this decade and the next. We are replacing our Type 23 Frigates with eight of the world’s most advanced anti-submarine warfare ships, the Type 26 Frigates. They will be bolstered by five general purpose Type 31 Frigates, providing opportunity to project power, support NATO operations and influence on the global stage. The Fleet Solid Support ships similarly represent the renewal of RFA solid support capability providing the ammunition, stores and spares to sustain global operations.
To ask His Majesty's Government what are the countries that have signed up to the Type 26 frigate programme.
To ask His Majesty's Government what are the countries that have signed up to the Type 26 frigate programme.
The Type 26 frigate programme is a UK programme. The recent announcement that Norway has selected the UK as their preferred strategic partner for Frigate procurement signals their intention to order Type 26 ships.
The Type 26 is already the reference design for the Australian Hunter Class Frigate Programme and the Canadian River Class Destroyer Programme.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether BAE Systems will run two building streams of Type 26 frigates to ensure that Royal Navy and Norwegian Navy delivery dates are met.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether BAE Systems will run two building streams of Type 26 frigates to ensure that Royal Navy and Norwegian Navy delivery dates are met.
The recent announcement by the Norwegian Government to select the UK as a strategic partner for the acquisition of Type (T26) warships is expected to provide a £10 billion boost to the UK economy and support more than 400 British companies.
Both the Royal Navy and Norwegian Navy T26 frigates will be built simultaneously by BAE Systems on the Clyde, benefitting from investments already made, such as the Janet Harvey Shipbuilding Hall in Govan. The new Shipbuilding Hall will improve schedule performance and the pace of delivery, reducing the time between future ship deliveries for both the UK and Norway.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to bring forward the in-service date of the first multi-role strike ship; and what steps they will take to increase the build rate of the five remaining multi-role strike ships.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to bring forward the in-service date of the first multi-role strike ship; and what steps they will take to increase the build rate of the five remaining multi-role strike ships.
The Multi-Role Strike Ship (MRSS) programme is progressing through the Concept Phase and remains on target for the first of class to be delivered in the early 2030s.
The Royal Navy and Defence Equipment and Support are conducting detailed work on key user requirements, conceptual designs, affordability, and exportability assessments. Alongside other shipbuilding programmes, they are maintaining engagement with all leading UK shipbuilding entities and the National Shipbuilding Office (NSO) on the best commercial approach to deliver for the Navy and the Nation.
To ask His Majesty’s Government whether the recently announced procurement of twelve F35A jets capable of carrying nuclear weapons will affect the planned procurement of F35B jets.
To ask His Majesty’s Government whether the recently announced procurement of twelve F35A jets capable of carrying nuclear weapons will affect the planned procurement of F35B jets.
I draw noble Lords’ attention, on my noble friend’s very serious point, to the fact that just last week I was in Singapore with the carrier strike group. What a proud moment it was for our country to see the “Prince of Wales” in Singapore harbour at the invitation of the Singapore Government, with F35Bs and helicopters all over it, to see the crew there and to visit the other ships that are part of it. I just wanted to say that but, in answer to my noble friend’s Question, I can confirm that the second procurement phase will consist of 12 F35As and 15 F35Bs, which will enable the stand-up of the third front-line squadron focused on F35Bs. Forty- one of the 48 F35Bs in the first procurement phase have been delivered, with 617 Squadron and 809 Naval Air Squadron both currently deployed on HMS “Prince of Wales” for Operation Highmast. We remain committed to 138 F35s across the life of the programme, and the defence investment programme will examine options on further purchases in the coming months.
I thank my noble friend the Minister for his reply, although my question has been rather shredded of various elements by the previous debate. It is worth remembering that 80 years ago as we speak, the British Pacific fleet was leaving the waters around Okinawa, heading towards the Japanese homeland. It consisted of a mere 21 aircraft carriers, four battleships and dozens of destroyers and frigates, which were in the same waters that the “Prince of Wales” is in now. They were under almost continuous attack by kamikazes, which you could argue are the ultimate drone. Whenever we discuss the military, we ought to remember those who have gone before and what they did to enable us to be here.
As for my question, I now have two bits left after everything that has been discussed. The first one is: does my noble friend believe that now might be time for us to review our nuclear doctrine? One could argue that it goes on all the time, but might it be time to do a proper review of our nuclear doctrine? The other one is: I had understood that major investment decisions—and this is one, bearing in mind the costs of having bases ready to take nuclear weapons and all of this sort of thing—were going to be made in the autumn as part of the defence investment plan to check out the national armaments director and the new strategic headquarters. Does the fact that this decision has been made now, without waiting for the autumn, mean that all the decisions from the SDR that we were expecting in the autumn will be taken piecemeal before then?
I thank my noble friend the Minister for his reply, although my question has been rather shredded of various elements by the previous debate. It is worth remembering that 80 years ago as we speak, the British Pacific fleet was leaving the waters around Okinawa, heading towards the Japanese homeland. It consisted of a mere 21 aircraft carriers, four battleships and dozens of destroyers and frigates, which were in the same waters that the “Prince of Wales” is in now. They were under almost continuous attack by kamikazes, which you could argue are the ultimate drone. Whenever we discuss the military, we ought to remember those who have gone before and what they did to enable us to be here.
As for my question, I now have two bits left after everything that has been discussed. The first one is: does my noble friend believe that now might be time for us to review our nuclear doctrine? One could argue that it goes on all the time, but might it be time to do a proper review of our nuclear doctrine? The other one is: I had understood that major investment decisions—and this is one, bearing in mind the costs of having bases ready to take nuclear weapons and all of this sort of thing—were going to be made in the autumn as part of the defence investment plan to check out the national armaments director and the new strategic headquarters. Does the fact that this decision has been made now, without waiting for the autumn, mean that all the decisions from the SDR that we were expecting in the autumn will be taken piecemeal before then?
I thank my noble friend for his questions. On his very serious and important point about those who made the ultimate sacrifice in the Far East, he will be pleased to know that, on my visit to Singapore, I visited the war grave cemetery there, and that when I was in Jakarta a day or two later, I visited the war grave cemetery there and laid a wreath to remember those who had gone before. I think that is really important.
On the issue of the nuclear doctrine, of course one always reflects on these matters but, as it stands, the nuclear doctrine is as it is. The major investment decisions, in terms of the money and the direction of
travel, remain the same. It was felt important, given the serious geopolitical challenges that we face and although the number of planes remains the same, that there should be some movement from F35Bs to F35As. It was important that we made that decision at this particular time in the light of the threat that we face.
My Lords, on Thursday evening, I spoke at the Cambridge Union on behalf of a motion that Britain should spend more on defence and needs more defence—and I am glad to say we won, much to my surprise. One young man came up to and said, “Do the Treasury actually understand how dangerous the world is and how important it is we should spend money on defence?” Does my noble friend the Minister agree that the Treasury does understand—or does it not understand?
My Lords, on Thursday evening, I spoke at the Cambridge Union on behalf of a motion that Britain should spend more on defence and needs more defence—and I am glad to say we won, much to my surprise. One young man came up to and said, “Do the Treasury actually understand how dangerous the world is and how important it is we should spend money on defence?” Does my noble friend the Minister agree that the Treasury does understand—or does it not understand?
I will give a very quick answer. I can tell my noble friend that the Treasury of course understands, and that is why the Government have
agreed to spend more money on defence: £3 billion more next year and a pathway to 2.5 % to be announced in the spring. That is a Treasury and a Government who recognise we need to spend more on defence, and we will do.
To ask His Majesty's Government when the eighth Type 26 frigate will join the Royal Navy.
To ask His Majesty's Government when the eighth Type 26 frigate will join the Royal Navy.
The T26 programme remains on track to meet all user requirements and deliver eight world-class anti-submarine warfare frigates in time to replace the anti-submarine warfare T23s. All ships are expected to enter service between 2028 and 2035.
Type 26 will allow the Royal Navy to continue to play a leading role in the anti-submarine theatre in the North Atlantic and beyond.
To ask His Majesty's Government how many F-35B jets will be in the UK inventory by May 2025.
To ask His Majesty's Government how many F-35B jets will be in the UK inventory by May 2025.
It is anticipated that the UK will have 41 F-35Bs on inventory by May 2025.
My Lords, further to the question from my noble friend Lord Browne, I think that the response from the MoD is not satisfactory. These Belarusians, although they might not have had access to highly classified information, were writing software that would be used within our nuclear deterrent. This cannot be satisfactory. Can the MoD give an answer, maybe through the Minister, to say that this is no longer allowed to happen? We all know how you can use software in various clever ways to cause real damage.
My Lords, further to the question from my noble friend Lord Browne, I think that the response from the MoD is not satisfactory. These Belarusians, although they might not have had access to highly classified information, were writing software that would be used within our nuclear deterrent. This cannot be satisfactory. Can the MoD give an answer, maybe through the Minister, to say that this is no longer allowed to happen? We all know how you can use software in various clever ways to cause real damage.
I will speak to my noble friend Lord Coaker and ask him to provide a letter responding to that point.
To ask His Majesty’s Government whether the Tempest Global Combat Air Programme will be halted until the Strategic Defence Review is completed and its future decided.
To ask His Majesty’s Government whether the Tempest Global Combat Air Programme will be halted until the Strategic Defence Review is completed and its future decided.
No, GCAP will not be halted, in answer to my noble friend. Progress continues. I met partners yesterday at Farnborough, as did the Prime Minister, emphasising its importance. The Defence Secretary met Ministers from Italy and Japan today to discuss developments, including economic growth and skills, and business will be taken through by SI in the next few days, subject to Parliament’s agreement, to implement the GCAP convention.
I thank my noble friend the Minister for his Answer. Of course, I understand that the mechanism of this programme has to move ahead, not least for diplomatic and political reasons, but would he assure me that, in the context of the strategic defence review, nothing is off the table, apart from the fact that we maintain a nuclear deterrent? That was what was said, effectively—so everything will be looked at. There must be serious concerns about the operational requirement for this system, which is not clearly articulated. How many platforms will be required, finally, and how many aircraft? That is not articulated. The costs are pretty open, I have to say, and it really does need to be looked at.
I thank my noble friend the Minister for his Answer. Of course, I understand that the mechanism of this programme has to move ahead, not least for diplomatic and political reasons, but would he assure me that, in the context of the strategic defence review, nothing is off the table, apart from the fact that we maintain a nuclear deterrent? That was what was said, effectively—so everything will be looked at. There must be serious concerns about the operational requirement for this system, which is not clearly articulated. How many platforms will be required, finally, and how many aircraft? That is not articulated. The costs are pretty open, I have to say, and it really does need to be looked at.
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for his important Question. The strategic defence review is a root-and-branch review to look at the capabilities that our Armed Forces will need as they meet the threats of a changing world. It will look at defence in the round—and, of course, it will look at programmes across the whole of defence. Can I just pick up on one point from my noble friend? As he says, in the review we do emphasise the importance of the deterrent as well as support for Ukraine and AUKUS.
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of speeding up delivery times for the Fleet Solid Support ships.
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of speeding up delivery times for the Fleet Solid Support ships.
The approved In-Service Date for the first Fleet Solid Support ship is 2031. The Royal Navy expects to manage RFA Fort Victoria's operational status as necessary to maintain solid support ship availability during the capability transition period. Should opportunities arise that will expedite these timelines, then the Department will consider those in a value for money context.
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to speed up delivery of the Type 26 frigates so as to avoid any decrease in the number of Royal Navy frigates.
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to speed up delivery of the Type 26 frigates so as to avoid any decrease in the number of Royal Navy frigates.
The delivery rate for the Type 26 ships is the optimum that can be achieved considering all relevant factors. Four of the Type 26 ships are now in construction on the Clyde. On current plans, HMS GLASGOW is forecast to achieve Initial Operating Capability in 2028 and construction of all eight frigates is expected to be completed by the mid-2030s.
The Type 26 Batch 2 deal introduces further investment in BAE Systems’ facilities on the Clyde, most obviously demonstrated by the start of work on a new shipbuilding hall at Govan. The new hall will allow two frigates to be built under cover simultaneously and allow the ships to be built faster, improving efficiency in the programme, and expanding the facilities for future work at the yard.
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of the new environmental, social and governance rules on (1) defence companies' costs and ability to access financial services, and (2) Ministry of Defence procurement costs.
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of the new environmental, social and governance rules on (1) defence companies' costs and ability to access financial services, and (2) Ministry of Defence procurement costs.
Trade associations and individual companies have raised the issue of ESG in discussions with Ministers and officials from across government.
While we have so far seen no evidence that ESG criteria are leading to increased procurement costs, we are aware of instances where companies, particularly SMEs, have found obstacles to accessing financial services.
Officials across Government are working closely with trade associations and the financial sector to understand the nature and extent of the issue, and agree mitigating actions where appropriate. The Government is unequivocal that there is nothing unethical about investing in and providing financial services to the UK defence sector and the financial services sector should not be disadvantaging companies based on their association with defence. On the contrary, a strong national defence is a pre-requisite for the freedoms and rule of law that we often take for granted.
Industry and Government are also showing leadership on all aspects of the ESG agenda as illustrated by the recent launch of the Defence Aviation Net Zero Strategy. We will continue this work with our industrial partners to explore and champion the wider environmental and social benefit of the defence sector.
I thank the Minister for her Answer. There is no doubt that it has been a long time before we have got various orders in. The Ukrainian war started 17 months ago, and a number of Members in this House, including the noble and gallant Lord on the Cross Benches, have referred to the fact that we need to put in various orders. That is not surprising, because for too long we have run a just-enough and just-in-time philosophy for war stocks and replacing ammunition and missiles. We are not a Marks & Spencer knocking out women’s underwear—that is not the basis on which we are providing stuff; it is much harder to provide missiles and weapons systems. Looking to the future, would it be possible for a cross-party initiative to produce a defence-industrial strategy that looks at making sure that our defence industries are sufficiently paid for, so that they can boost the supply of weapons in crisis and war?
I thank the Minister for her Answer. There is no doubt that it has been a long time before we have got various orders in. The Ukrainian war started 17 months ago, and a number of Members in this House, including the noble and gallant Lord on the Cross Benches, have referred to the fact that we need to put in various orders. That is not surprising, because for too long we have run a just-enough and just-in-time philosophy for war stocks and replacing ammunition and missiles. We are not a Marks & Spencer knocking out women’s underwear—that is not the basis on which we are providing stuff; it is much harder to provide missiles and weapons systems. Looking to the future, would it be possible for a cross-party initiative to produce a defence-industrial strategy that looks at making sure that our defence industries are sufficiently paid for, so that they can boost the supply of weapons in crisis and war?
The noble Lord will be aware of two things. There has been an extensive supply of weapons to Ukraine, evidenced by the recent Written Statement that I laid before this House on 20 July. He will also be aware that there has been an overall challenge with the industry, experienced by other NATO members, because some of them were not production ready; we know that. The MoD has engaged closely. The industry is now in a much healthier state and I hope the recent list of orders, which I indicated, reflects that much healthier state and that the MoD is satisfied that, along with our NATO partners, industry is now geared up to supply what is needed.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what orders they have made so far, by weapon type, to replace ammunition and missile stocks given to Ukraine.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what orders they have made so far, by weapon type, to replace ammunition and missile stocks given to Ukraine.
My Lords, I can confirm that a number of substantial contracts have been placed to directly replace munitions granted in kind to Ukraine. The contracts secured so far include orders for next generation light anti-tank weapons, Starstreak high-velocity missiles, lightweight multirole missiles, Javelin missiles, Brimstone missiles, 155-millimetre artillery rounds and 5.56-millimetre rifle rounds.
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the reply by Baroness Goldie on 20 June (HL Deb col 100), whether the Ministry of Defence will raise with the Treasury the case for having a multi-year rolling programme of warship orders.
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the reply by Baroness Goldie on 20 June (HL Deb col 100), whether the Ministry of Defence will raise with the Treasury the case for having a multi-year rolling programme of warship orders.
The Royal Navy (RN) has ambitious plans to ensure its fleet remains modern and capable of dealing with evolving threats. Regular discussions take place between the RN, the Ministry of Defence and His Majesty's Treasury to ensure this is funded in a way that provides value for money for taxpayers and the best capability for the RN.
The National Shipbuilding Strategy Refresh, published on 10 March 2022, sets out the ambition for the pipeline of more than 150 new naval and civil vessels for the UK Government and Devolved Administrations over the next 30 years.