Procurement of Mastiff and Vector
armoured vehicles
15. In addition to the upgrade of its existing fleet
of vehicles, the Secretary of State for Defence announced on 24
July 2006 that the MoD had procured 100 Cougar armoured wheeled
patrol vehicles (to be known by the UK Army as "Mastiff")
and 100 Vector force protection vehicles[24]
(in addition to the 66 already on order) for deployment in Iraq
and Afghanistan. General Figgures told us that the vehicles would
be deployed in theatre in 2007.[25]
The Minister for the Armed Forces subsequently announced to the
House that, on current plans, fully operational Vector vehicles
"should be delivered to Afghanistan by February 2007 and
delivery of the full fleet by August 2007".[26]
16. The MoD told us that Mastiff and Vector did not
possess the capability the Army required in the long-term. General
Figgures told us that Mastiff and Vector
are not armoured fighting vehicles, they are a means
of conveying people from A to B [with reduced risk] so they would
not do what we require from FRES. They would not be able to carry
out offensive action in the way that we would anticipate.[27]
17. During our inquiry into the MoD's Annual Report
and Accounts 2005-06, the MoD told us that the cost of procuring
Mastiff and Vector was expected to be in the region of £120
million.[28] The MoD
added that the funding of the procurement of Vector had been drawn
from its own resources, but funds for the procurement of Mastiff,
some £70 million, had been made available by the Treasury.[29]
18. During this inquiry we asked the MoD whether
the funds used to procure Mastiff had been drawn from funds allocated
to the FRES budget. The Chief of Defence Procurement (CDP) told
us that the funds allocated for Urgent Operational Requirements
(UORs) such as Mastiff, and funds for future development programmes
were separate.[30] He
told us categorically that "These UORs have not impacted
on the budget for FRES, full stop".[31]
19. We asked the MoD where the financial burden for
maintaining these vehicles over the long term would fall. The
MoD stated that:
while Vector and Mastiff are deployed on operations,
support costs will be funded by the Treasury as a net operational
cost of the operation. When the vehicles are no longer needed
on the operation the support costs will fall to the MoD.[32]
Once the vehicles were no longer deployed on operations,
CDP told us that that the on-going maintenance cost of the vehicles
would not impact on the budgets for other procurement projects.[33]
20. We
welcome the MoD's action in meeting the immediate operational
need for a medium-weight armoured vehicle in Iraq and Afghanistan.
But the procurement of Mastiff and Vector does not provide a long-term
solution to the Army's medium-weight vehicle requirement.
21. We welcome
the fact that the Treasury has funded the procurement of Mastiff
but are disappointed that it did not make the funds available
for the Vector procurement. On present plans the post-operations,
through-life maintenance costs for Vector and Mastiff will fall
on the defence budget. The Treasury should make additional funds
available to the MoD for the through-life support and maintenance
of Vector and Mastiff.
22. The procurement
of Mastiff and Vector must not deflect the MoD from working to
meet the requirement for medium-weight vehicles over the longer
term.
21 
