1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148 
STAKES ARE HIGH
Page 5
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• Before June comes to an end, two truck manufacturers will be bitterly disappointed and one will be celebrating. The reason for these mixed emotions will be the decision on the British Army's 2150 million General Service truck contract. The chances are that whoever sells to the British Army will go on to sell to the rest of the world. As for the losers, who will buy a truck the British Army didn't want?
Leyland Daf, AWD and Volvo can't all win the business, of course, and the also-rans will have to live with hefty costs. Last December, Leyland Daf confirmed that its development costs were over 23 million. And, according to the company's then chief-executive George Simpson (now managing director of the Rover Group), "all costs, which run into millions of pounds, will effectively have to be written off'.
If only for this reason, it is imperative that the Ministry of Defence makes the right decision, based on objective performance criteria, uninfluenced by the bullying and blustering of a handful of backbench MPs whose constituencies include the truck plants at Dunstable, Leyland and Irvine. The MoD, like any other ministry, has been known to make the odd mistake, or at least to take decisions not always supported by Britain's service chiefs. There was the matter of Nimrod vs AWACS; TSR2; Blue Streak. And let's not forget the fiascos over DROPS, Westland, Challenger. Perhaps it's not such a short list after all.
There are a number of reasons why the four-tonne contract is so important to the three competitors. For any truck manufacturer — particularly a fledgling like AWD military business represents an excellent hedge against the cyclical nature of the domestic market. And the order is likely to be the biggest in Europe for the next five years.
At the end of last year, Simpson went on the record by answering the question over how the MoD was handling the contract. "They are adopting a much more competition-orientated approach to procurement. . . the concept of having an open competition and deciding it on best value criteria is one which appeals to our competitive spirit and sense of fairness, and as long as product and price and not politics are the driving forces, then we are more than happy to enter the fray. . . our view of how the competition has been conducted so far is that it has been professional, even-handed and fair."
Whether Leyland Daf, AWD and Volvo will feel the same way after the end of this month is up to the MoD.