Comments on: MP Jack’s all over BAe whitewash

By: John Bickerstaffe

John Bickerstaffe — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 17:38:51 +0000

I’ve no problem with foreign governments being bribed, either… It’s when it happens on our home turf, with our money at risk in return, that it becomes a problem.

And whilst unemployment is depressing, I’d far rather not see stories like this: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6894003.ece

By: John Bickerstaffe

John Bickerstaffe — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 17:31:45 +0000

But that’s pottery… A world away from defence systems!

And I’m not convinced that the pot industry is sucking on the tit of the British taxpayer, ergo it has an incentive to churn out decent quality stuff or else nobody wants to buy it (see British car manufacturing for further info).

The F-35 programme isn’t wholly foreign – it got our buy-in because BAe Systems are part of the consortium building the aircraft.

We now have the worst of both worlds because we’re unofficially committed to buying the aircraft, whilst not being given the level of support that was originally negotiated for the programme. If we were just customers, we could quite easily walk away from it all if Obama didn’t want to give us access to the source code – we’d be in a much better position.

There’s no reason why the best equipment can be made here, but as it happens, we lag behind by treating the defence industry like Soviet shoe manufacturing. We shouldn’t just give our armed forces resources simply because it has a Union flag on it and a handful of people are kept financially afloat because they haven’t retrained as something more productive and useful.

By: Frustrated

Frustrated — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 17:30:35 +0000

I have no problem with BAe bribing people abroad to buy their equipment. It’s the foreign government’s look-out and whilst the Americans pretend to be so pious they’d do (and have done) exactly the same thing. That is planet reality – when you can’t control the other countries, there is nothing you can do.
Michael Jack of course is standing down so he doesn’t seem to care as much about the jobs at BAe – which in Fylde is one of few big employers that we have and if it goes we would have enormous unemployment statistics.
He was also a relative expenses hero – though he did have to pay back for a large American fridge/freezer and he had Italian lessons at the taxpayers expense (privately arranged in his own House of Commons Office). If anyone can think why he would need Italian for his job, his region (surely Arabic would be more useful for BAe), his committee memberships (http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/michael_jack/fylde#topics) then answers on a postcard.
If anyone thinks he might need it though when he retires to the villa in Tuscany he owns then you must be wrong as he is now on the committees set up to deal with the tawdry behaviour of other MPs.

By: Zim Flyer

Zim Flyer — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 17:18:56 +0000

From what I’ve seen of the pottery industry, I would take British made over foreign tat anyday. You pay more but you get what you pay for.

There is also the question of trust when it comes to buying from overseas just look at this fiasco: http://www.defencemanagement.com/news_story.asp?id=11566

By: Philtheone

Philtheone — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 17:01:33 +0000

Well, it’s what the people that have to use it think.

The fact is the best equipment isn’t made here.

By: Zim Flyer

Zim Flyer — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 16:27:48 +0000

I believe the best equipment can be made here, the alternative is to out source everything and who is to say foreign equipment will be any better?

By: Zim Flyer

Zim Flyer — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 15:12:06 +0000

I have no problems with bribing a foreign government if it means we get the defence contract.

Where as corruption by our governing class is a different matter due to the money we lose.

I’m sure over the years to come the bigger corruption scandal won’t be MP’s expenses but the amount of money we have lost with PFI’s.

By: John Bickerstaffe

John Bickerstaffe — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:49:39 +0000

We’re in a position now where a majority of people are subsidised by the state in some way, whether it’s through benefits, bribes (sorry, ‘tax credits’) or direct and indirect employment.

Money is directed towards those who can bang their drum the loudest in public.

By: John Bickerstaffe

John Bickerstaffe — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:47:44 +0000

Well, to be fair, I haven’t said that the FAC shouldn’t be built by British workers.

It rather depends on what you think the primary purpose of the aircraft carrier is: is it for defence, or is it for giving people something to do? It can’t be both.

My preferred motive when it comes to defence procurement is that our armed forces are provided with the appropriate resources, of the best quality at value for money. I don’t want us to be sending our armed forces out with inappropriate junk that’s cost us a fortune.

Another way of looking at it is that if we spend on bloated defence projects that provide work for, say, 200 workers over five years, it takes away the opportunity elsewhere.

By: Philtheone

Philtheone — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:18:23 +0000

And on the subject of the carrier, why don’t we just evolve into communist USSR and have everyone paid to work for the Government rather than just a few shipbuilders?