Ministry of Defence paid £22 for a 65p light bulb
A soldier who works in stores in an army base here in Britain contacted the Sun newspaper and said “You’re talking about a fortune for these bulbs. If I order 100, that’s over two grand. But you can pick them up for 65p each, the exact same ones. There must be thousands of lightbulbs across the MoD. If people paid attention to simple things like this, they could save a lot of money – and maybe jobs.”
Defence Secretary Dr Liam Fox told the Sun “We are already tackling the procurement problems we inherited head-on. When money is tight and we need to protect the front line, waste is inexcusable.
“This is classic evidence of how Labour wasted taxpayers’ money and shows a complete lack of common sense. No wonder the last government left the MoD with a budget deficit of £38 billion.”
Read more: http://www.economicvoice.com/ministry-of-defence-paid-22-for-a-65p-light-bulb/50017095#ixzz1Fqk8JScM
MoD rows back on '£22 for 65p light bulb' denial
The MoD at first insisted the bulbs were highly specialised parts for a radar system, but later said the thrust of the Sun's story was correct. An MoD spokeswoman had earlier said of the bulb: "It was a lamp filament for the Watchman radar. The MoD uses about five per year."
Reacting to the story earlier, Defence Secretary Liam Fox had described it as "inexcusable" and evidence of a waste of taxpayers' money by the previous Labour government.
This highlights the situation that procurement housekeeping seems to take place under new management. As further proof of the observation is this article, leading off with the light bulb affair.
Fighting waste
Today's revelations about waste at the Ministry of Defence underline the need for a thorough review of its procurement procedures. It has, for example, admitted paying £22 each for light bulbs that cost 65p. This is only the tip of the iceberg. Last month a Commons Public Accounts Committee report found that the Government's defence review alone will lead to waste of nearly £5 billion, largely because of the way contracts were drawn up. Meanwhile a National Audit Office last October found a £36 billion black hole in the MoD's procurement budget.
It's not just jolly old UK. Toronto, Canada has its own illuminating experiences.
Former TCHC board member calls for resignations
Among the findings by Auditor General Jeff Griffiths were that the board approved policy and procedures on procurement were routinely ignored.
As a result there were incidents of single-tendering [sole sourcing] of contracts, including one totalling $25 million, conflicts of interest weren’t documented properly and purchase orders totalling millions were split to avoid requiring directors’ approval.
The auditor also questioned why a single $415,000 purchase for light bulbs from a Chinese supplier in 2006, evolved into nearly $5 million in goods, including toilets, sinks, faucets and tiles with little documentation except the approval of TCHC’s former chief financial officer.
“The Chinese stuff never came to the board,” Mammoliti said. “Nobody on the board would have agreed to bring in all those toilets from China without a contract.”
As for the $200,000 in inappropriate expenses flagged by the auditor that included meetings at spas, massages at picnics, chocolates and boat cruises, Mammoliti said those wouldn’t have come to the board for approval.
No comments:
Post a Comment