Examination of Witnesses (Question Numbers
40-59)
GENERAL SIR
KEVIN O'DONOGHUE,
DR ANDREW
TYLER AND
MR GUY
LESTER
1 DECEMBER 2009
Q40 Chairman: Why not?
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
Because it is a very thick report. I could go through and agree
with that phrase and disagree with that phrase.
Q41 Chairman: But it is the key thing
you are telling me you disagree with?
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
No, it is not. What I disagree with him significantly about is
the mathematical figures on finances.
Q42 Chairman: But you have not told
him you disagree with him then?
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
Oh, yes. I have told him I disagree with him. Yes, of course I
have. I have not told him I specifically disagree with the figure
you just produced on percentages, which I think was 21%.
Q43 Chairman: No, I would not have
expected you to have told him that. You did not actually disagree
with that; you said you just did not recognise it?
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
Precisely.
Q44 Chairman: What about this £35
billion adrift, 80%, those figures? Have you told him you disagree
with that?
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
I personally have been part of a meeting where those figures have
been discussed, yes.
Q45 Mr Jenkins: I tend to have a
lot of sympathy with regard to the Gray report, Sir Kevin. Having
sat on the PAC for a number of years I recognise that the National
Audit Office are to me the more regular producers of reports with
regard to defence. I can go back eight or nine years and see the
sort of slippage we make, the time slippage and the financial
slippage, and I understand the reasons why. Is it possible to
ask the National Audit Office to come up with a snapshot of 20,
15, 10, five years ago and today and see the overrun as a percentage
of the total cost and the time slippage as a percentage of the
project times etc, so we can actually nail down and prove once
and for all that there is no great dip or rise, but it is a constant
problem we have had to endure for a number of years because of
the very nature of this beast? Could we do that and get it as
a set of tables?
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
I am sure we could.
Q46 Mr Jenkins: Would you do it?
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
I am not sure I can task the NAO. I am not sure that is within
my gift. I think the Public Accounts Committee would be the Committee
to task them.
Q47 Mr Jenkins: The National Audit
Office does regulate and produce the accounts for the MoD, and
the Permanent Secretary signs them off?
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
Yes.
Q48 Mr Jenkins: So is it within his
gift?
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
I do not know. I am sorry, I am not sure that it is within our
gift to task the auditors.
Mr Lester: I think we could ask
them the question. We do not formally task them though. They work
for the PAC.
Q49 Mr Jenkins: Would it be of any
interest, do you think, to a public debate on the Gray report
if we got those figures?
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
Yes. I agree your premise, and we have had this debate last year
and the year before that the equipment programme has been overheated
for many years. I agree with that.
Q50 Mr Jenkins: Like the figure about
the IPT leaders, for many years we have said, "If you can
find me a project which started off and has run for three years
or longer with the same project leader in charge, I'll buy you
a drink".
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
Okay, you are on!
Q51 Mr Jenkins: Because they are
moved regularly and the rationale and the reason why they are
moved is because of their career, they get promotion or they move
up etc., but those who are a bit cynical say when you actually
tackle them and say "Who did this", they say, "I
don't know I wasn't in charge of the project then". What
are the percentages of the projects you actually finish which
start out with the original team leadership?
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
I would think very few start and finish. Very few of the big projects,
the UORs, yes, but if you have got a project running eight or
nine years I suspect that you are right; I suspect very few start
and finish with the same team leader. Actually, that is not necessarily
a bad thing. Sometimes, get it to Initial Gate, get a fresh pair
of eyes; get it to Main Gate, get a fresh pair of eyes; get it
through its first in-service phase. I do not think it is necessarily
a bad thing; which is why, in answer to the Chairman, I do not
believe 21% of turnover is a problem.
Q52 Chairman: It is one thing to
say that it may be a good thing to have a high turnover; it is
a wholly different thing to say that Bernard Gray's analysis of
whether there has been a high turnover is wrong.
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
No, I said I did not recognise it.
Q53 Chairman: You said, when I put
the figures to you, that you did not recognise those figures because
you had not done the maths?
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
Indeed.
Q54 Chairman: But you said also beforehand
that you did not think that there had been a higher turnover of
IPT staff. Is that because you had not done the maths?
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
No. I genuinely do not know. The first figure you quote is 2003,
that is in the DPA days, and I have not done those maths.
Q55 Chairman: No. I was just using
that as an example as to how his figures might have been correct,
but you have not done that maths?
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
No, I have not done that maths.
Q56 Chairman: Generally speaking,
you have to accept I think, do you not, that there has been a
higher turnover of staff in these IPTs, unless you can suggest
that there is some refuting maths and refuting analysis?
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
Maybe. Bear in mind that 850 people at the moment in Dr Tyler's
area are working on UORs. They have moved away from the project
teams they were originally on to work on UORs; this is in 2009.
I just do not recognise the figure, and I do not believe it is
a problem.
Dr Tyler: The issue is surely
one of materiality is it not, as to whether this is a trend in
numbers which is now giving rise to some downturn in performance;
and I do not think that cause and effect link is proven at all.
Part of the reason why I think there is some difficulty in producing
these numbers is because—as we have settled DE&S down
over the last three years, taking it from being fit for purpose
in April 2007 to the state we are now—we have been doing
quite a lot of restructuring within operating centres, and quite
a few of the job titles and the project team boundaries have been
changing. Sometimes when these rather core statistics are generated
confusion can come in because somebody's job title has changed
between one job and another but, in essence, their role and responsibility
has remained much the same. That is a confusion we have had quite
recently in another piece of work that is being done.
Q57 Mr Jenkins: I agree—that
is exactly the point I am trying to get to now with regard to
the make-up of the team. If you get a specialist come in, he might
go in and out of a team and move along teams because experience
is needed in each team. It is not the make-up of the team that
I am asking you to defend now, it is: who would you consider to
be the leadership in that team? How consistent, how permanent
is the leadership of the team? At which stage do you move the
leadership of the team? If you feel happy you get to Gate One,
or Main Gate, you can actually move the leadership on then because
they have done their task, they have completed their route? Having
signed off at that stage, they have completed their task. How
many leaders have changed before they complete their task? Do
we keep records of this sort of nature? Could you do a survey
and say in these 20 projects this is okay and that is okay?
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
We could certainly do it for at least 20 projects. If you would
like me to do it for these 20 I can certainly do it.[3]
The 20 in the—
Q58 Mr Jenkins: Any 20, and say,
"These are the ones we have had over this time, the leadership
is there but the team might be different underneath".
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
Why do I not do it on the MPR list of projects?
Q59 Chairman: Hold on, CDM. Can I
just say, the Secretary of State last week told us that your Department
was going to produce a response to the Bernard Gray review.
General Sir Kevin O'Donoghue:
It is.
3 Ev 113 Back
| 
