Fact is the government wants the MOD to do more with less.

They opted under Blair to buy the more expensive Type 45 air defence system when it was well known that buying american would have been cheaper, better and more capable

Same for Nimrod, we could have bought P8 Poseidon just as Australia is doing, which is cheaper and better.

Likewise as has been seen with the C17, delivered on time, on budget, unlike the A400M. For me, the government need to accept that their procurement strategy has been unrealistic and they need to buy American as it will save them billions.

But until they are willing to do so, budgets will continue to spiral out of control.

Rather silly really.

Mr T. Warburton, London,

What do you expect from a Prime Minister who hates the armed forces since he failed the entrance exam for the Navy, a part time defence minister, a monopoly defence supplier and constant budget cuts in order to fund very inefficient public services.

The whole lot together could not organize a party in a brewery.

Michael Hunt, Paris, France

ENGLISH John? Last time I looked the Defence Secretary was a Scot as was the PM and passed Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer!

Stuart, WINCHESTER, Hampshire,

I find it very interesting that John Edgar takes a typically Scottish isolationist view and blames the 'English' - especially seeing as the over budget Type 45's are rolling out of yards on the Clyde!

Jason, London,

Priority spending for the services is paramount in order to protect our lives. If it goes over budget big deal, when where willing to waste a fortune on ID cards and bereaucracy.
This is not the example to grumble about overspending.

Peter Mears, maghull, Liverpool

In response to Mr Edgar from Fife - If Rolls Royce and Bently's cars are what you think of when it comes to English Flagship companies it is of no wonder that you post such ill informed comments. Firstly, what you're talking about has nothing to do with the procurement of military hardware and the modernising of a seriously outdated fleet available to our armed forces and their modern role in Europe, UN and the rest of the world. And if you want English flagship companies there are many including Rolls Royce (they make engines and many things besides you know!). Costs overruns tend to be due to long project lead times and their susceptibility to the fluctuating echange rates and comodity prices on the world markets. combine that with increases in production costs, and no doubt changes in requirements on behalf of the MOD, and you've a recipe for a large difference between estimate and Actual cost.

D Buxton, Sheffield, England

W hy do the English still insist on trying to be a world power? They spend UK taxpayers money on these little projects with cost overruns trying to hold on to the past! Get real! Be part of Europe and stop trying to be what you are not. Look at the evidence! All the English flagship companies are in Continental hands! Rolls Royce cars (BMW), Bently(VW) etc.

John Edgar, CUPAR, Fife, Scotland

The only way to control price is through free competition between at least three competitors and to have three competitors requires that the nations financial institutions make sufficient capital available to ensure we have a competitive industrial base upon which to found a reliable supply of the needs to defend the nation. Instead, what we have is the nations financial institutions have set as their benchmark the need to maximise THEIR income from a single supplier. As a result, the financial institutions set out to merge and aquire until they had not three, but one single supplier. If ever we needed an example of how M&A serves the financial institutions rather than the needs of the wider nation, this is it. You simply cannot ensure competitive supply of ANYTHING without competition. The nation needs at the least three suppliers to its defence needs and the sooner the better. The Treasury, Bank of England and the FSA need to address the urgent renewal of the private capital required

Chris Coles, Medstead, Alton, United Kingdom

Technological leadership comes at a premium (not a price).

No name, No place,

£500 million is small beer.This Brown and previous Blair Governments pour this down the drain on a weekly basis at least.
Whatever they promise to spend of our money is passed through an administration of unique incompetence.Spending or investment ,as they prefer to call it,is the answer to all ills from politicians while they have not the slightest tallent or interest in the management of the vast numbers they boast.
We have arranged a sysyem where their nakedness is covered by £50 notes and the entire tax take is spent to defend their ineptitude.

robert everitt, wolverhampton,

Demonstrates the technical incompetence and ignorance of the MPs who are in charge. The have no understanding of the issues. They seem to think building defence equipment is equivalent to buying a car from a dealership.
They demand everything for equivalent pittence and complain when their stupid requests cannot be met.
When Nimrod was first bid for by BAE no other contractor would touch it with a barge pole because they knew that what the government wanted was impossible at that price. BAE saw it as an opportunity to provie its-self technically as a prime contractor and must have expected to take the loss.
Once again British MPs would rather shop in the US or abroad than support our industry AND then they will turn round and complain at loss of jobs, skill and on.. and on... and on...
The only reason the US seems to do stuff so quickly is the huge sums of money thrown at it. What we do, on shoe-string budgets is amazing!

Nathan, Inverness, UK

Taking the Type 45's, Perhaps it's to do with the fact that the navy planned for having 8 ships and the treasury has only allowed them to build six. The R&D costs now have to be spread across fewer vessels as do all the costs production - it doesn't take a genius to work out that individual ships will cost more!. The treasury also limits the 'cash flow' so that the ships take twice as long to build as they should - it takes us five years to build a type 45, the Japanese build the equivilent in less than three!!!. As for the projected carriers - we should buy those from America, at least we would know exactly how much hey would cost and we know that they 'work'...

David Harrison, Grantham, UK

£500 million is absolutely nothing compared to the billions spent proping up Nortrhern Rock and at least the tax payer will get something for the money.

Tom, Bristol,

There is more than a suspicion that the problem lies entirely with MOD and the Treasury - anyone who has worked in the defence industry know that our Government has two particularly bad habits - turning the funding stream on and off, with long gaps in between and requiring a virtual total halt to all work; and constantly changing the specifications required.

The departure of Lord Drayson, who appears to have had enough of the shifting sands of Brown's financial management, is a huge blow to any hope of reforming the system. Our lightweight Defence Ministers are simply out-gunned by the Treasury.

Neil Marshall, Cambridge, UK

It is an imperative that the U.K retain at least one, preferably several organisations which are technically capable, and this , by reasonable logic, says that the U.K also needs political leadership which is equally competent, sorry to be an 'Eeyore' but the first is easier to do than the second.

wpo, warsaw, n.y.

I agree with V. Seymour.

I would love to see the BAe change order logs!!

Also how does the MOD and BAe handle the "latest & best" technology issue. In the gestation period for these projects there must be quantum leaps in some tof the systems, and these will come at additional cost.

All changes are at today's costs rather than the original sharpest pencil prices during the tender process.

David, Dubai, UAE

I would rather pay for the defence of my country than:
1. Health tourists.
2. Immigrants that take benifits.
3. Unmarried teenage mothers who grab benifits.
Still, I have no choice in any of them, but I wish people would get their priorities right and defense of the realm should be number 1!

Pete, St Albans, England

What is it with the press constantly bashing BAE SYSTEMS, who continue to provide highly skilled jobs to thousands of British people. Also its worth noting that this £500m is nothing compared to the likes of the Northern Rock shambles which is costing the tax payer £55Bn, get a prospective. I am sure the people of this country, especially the media seem to think we don't need any manufacturing or skilled jobs in the UK. Its a disgrace, we need MORE skilled, manufacturing jobs! BAE SYSTEMS is one of the last hopes for any meaningful material exports from this country.

Mike, East Riding of Yorkshire, UK

It is inacurate in my view to say the type 45 is only 2 years late. The original replacement for the Type 42s was due in 2000, which to me makes them now 8 years late. This was a situation which Jane's defence once described as a "national disgrace". Why are BAe/MoD not being held accountable for this?

ian Robertson, Helsinki, Finland

The question to asked is when the ships were being built is, how many times during their building did the MoD change the specifications?

V Seymour, Ferndown, England

Who cares, the cost overuns are nothing compared to the Oylmpics, and and least this money is supporting skilled technical jobs in this country. Not to mention the fact that it will provide the country something it actually needs. Big complex engineering projects can over run on costs, at least it will be completed. Unlike the NHS IT system, ID cards or New deal, all of which have wasted far more than this has cost.

Kevin, aylesbury, Bucks