FDR – Land (Logistics and Combat Service Support #2)

The Royal Logistic Corps is making a huge contribution to operations in Afghanistan, however, the overall MoD wide management of supply chain accounting has come in for some severe criticism, the NAO releasing a fairly damning report on equipment accounting procedures.


The NAO report stated

“Despite action by the Department to improve its asset management and accounting, the issues I have identified are systemic and deep-rooted.  The level of control exercised by the Department is not yet sufficient to enable me to provide an opinion on a significant proportion of assets reported in the financial statements.”

Amyas Morse, head of the National Audit Office, 26 July 2010

One is left wondering if some of the problems are a result of the fragmentation of responsibility for logistics and equipment accounting to various military, MoD agencies and civilian organisations.

The post of MoD Commercial Director was created as a result of the 2005 Defence Industrial Strategy was to take the lead in shaping the departments relationship with industry and future strategic commercial arrangements.

The first post holder came from an accounting background and was a partner at PriceWaterhouseCoopers, upon joining he said

“I am very pleased to be joining a dedicated group of professionals in the Ministry of Defence. I will work hard to lead, support and develop the commercial team in MOD, to build strong relationships with industry, and, working with both, to help deliver good results for our armed forces, the taxpayer, and business.”

So who was the first post holder

Say hello to Mr Amyas Morse, forging relationships with industry, the people who bought us JPA, JAMES and numerous other IT systems that always seem to deliver less than they promise. For another view on the impact that Amyas had on the MoD, click here and our take on JPA, here

Perhaps Mr Morse knows too much!

This might seem like something that only concerns the bean counters, those paper clip empire building bureaucrats that the mainstream media like so much to vilify but it has very real operational impact. If you do not know where something actually is you will not be able to use it when you need it, on operations for example. Equipment is no longer disposable, the value of almost everything in the inventory has risen and as we look to upgrading rather than buying new we absolutely have to know where equipment is at any given point.

To further highlight the very real issues of supply chain management have a read of AVM Jock Stirrups evidence to the Chilcot inquiry, especially with regard to body armour.

The MoD claim that the BOWMAN equipment hasn’t been lost, its just can’t locate exactly where it is, anyone who has ever been charged for a diffy tent peg on their 1033 might find this defence rather amusing.

I will keep this one short, just a set of basic suggestion without much background because, to be perfectly honest, I don’t know that much about the subject, please ignore my ignorance

  • Create a new joint service mega Corps to manage all Combat Service Support functions, merging the RLC, AGC and REME into a single integrated support group.
  • Transfer the RLC Pioneers to the Royal Engineers
  • Embed a CSS cadre with all combat and combat support units to ensure an effective end to end supply chain, as low as squadron or battalion level if needed to support sub unit QM’s. This would replicate and enhance the existing REME Light Aid Detachment function and extend into logistics issues.
  • Transfer all RAF and RN logistics functions into the new group, including catering and engineering (maybe a bit too far but included as a talking point)
  • Instead of the piecemeal and poorly integrated system we have now, invest in a proper end to end logistics management application with the appropriate tracking equipment and training. Above all though, despite the differences in between the services, it must be a single system.
  • Reconsider the use of consultants; partner with worldwide logistics organisations for skills transfer or simply develop expertise in house
  • Consider moving all transport and logistics equipment into the tri service CSS Corps, including the RFA and RAF transport. Support helicopters might even be included in this. This will create a truly seamless, joint logistics organisation that has control of all the means of delivery of fuel, ammunition and others stores (OK, even more wild than above!)
  • A serious, independent review of DSDA and its integration with other MoD supply chain and accounting functions

About Think Defence

Think Defence hopes to start sensible conversations about UK defence issues, no agenda or no campaign but there might be one or two posts on containers, bridges and mexeflotes!

7 thoughts on “FDR – Land (Logistics and Combat Service Support #2)

  1. Jed

    Seriously dude, in your first post you accuse the RLC of being too big, and unwieldy, but then you to form an even bigger ‘uber-corps’ ? mmmmmm’ can’t say I am with you on that one….

    Ref: “Transfer all RAF and RN logistics functions into the new group, including catering and engineering (maybe a bit too far but included as a talking point)” Oy vay, talking point….

    Join the Navy and see the world, unless of course you want to be a Chief or Stores Accountant (if they still call them that) – in which case you join the Really Big Corps (might need to talk to Royal Bank of Canada about using RBC…) and you might go to sea once or twice, but most of the time your going to be cooking in field kitchens for NATO RRC HQ, or maybe working at RAF About-to-be-closed….

    Soooo many issues with that one sir !! :-)

  2. admin

    I think I said one of the problems with the RLC is that it might be too big but there are arguments for it being even bigger

    A bit schizophrenic I know but it’s not an area I have a great deal of time on

    As for a common tri-service CSS corps, seriously, why not

    I like to challenge the norm, we have always done it like that doesnt work any more

  3. paul g

    so instead of having an AGC clerk spending 3 years with the REME spending half that time learning all the technical terminologies, various form numbers (890′s,F700,1043 etc etc). just have a REME clerk that stays with the REME and can crack on fromday 1 of arriving. “oh the wheels on the bus go round and round!!!”
    to summerise just go back 15 years to how it used to be and WORKED

  4. admin

    Paul, you are ex REME aren’t you, what do you think about merging with the RLC and AGC to form a large CSS Corps, possibly even with responsibility for RAF and RN aspects.

    A bridge to far or sensible evolution?

  5. paul g

    i can only give a personnal view but i can’t see it being a good idea, in fact i’d go as far as to say the formation of the RLC was a bad idea. expertise was diluted and some bright spark on a higher pay scale than most had a habit of posting people into different jobs (see dilution).
    The REME clerks that i experienced were proud to be a part of the REME, and as i said the experience they gained became invaluable. If merging was to raise it’s head then the REME seems to crop up a number of times, aviation trades are always favourites as they spend their entire career with the air corps, although bring that up in the mess make sure you’re by the fire exit!!!
    Back to subject if anything i would merge trades of the RLC into REME and beef up the tech storeman role,making a one badge shop for the (technical) stores chain.
    I’m sure someone from the RLC might feel different but i felt they suddenly became small fish in a big big pond, a restructre was a good idea but eggs and basket spring to mind.
    A bit of a ramble i know,again just my humble view, but i can draw on postings with armour,aviation,command and airborne/air assault wksps

  6. chris

    I came out in 87, after 14 years as a Clerk REME. I find it sad they binned the job in 97 (or so I am led to believe). Badged clerks (or storemen – sorry sup specs) – worked perfectly well whether REME, RA or anything else. Badged you are part of the LAD or workshop and fit in and understand the ethos, form numbers etc. Non badged and you are DIFFERENT! and far less effective. I spent five of those years at E2; two in NI and three at the APSC; good postings but missed being in a workshop. I do have vivid memories of WRAC G2 clerks being far less effective than RAOC Staff clerks as they posted them anywhere will no continuity between jobs; it was a bad idea then and still seems a very poor one now!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>