There is a growing sense of anticipation across the defence sector as we wait for the government’s delayed Defence Investment Plan (DIP). Industry wants clarity on priorities, timings and investment.
However, I'm seeing this anticipation turning to frustration. The delay of more than six months has left the UK behind Germany and the US in attracting global investment. ADS’s Samira Braund told MPs that the defence ecosystem is “not in a great place” and described it as “paralysis.”
Lord George Robertson, former defence secretary who wrote the Strategic Defence Review, has warned that Britain’s national security is “in peril” and criticised what he called a “corrosive complacency” towards defence, pointing to serious shortfalls across logistics, engineering, ammunition, training and wider support.
What we don't want is perceived paralysis to become a self-fulfilling prophecy. We are a nation renowned for industrial manufacturing and engineering excellence, and we need to harness that to build sovereign capability.
That is why readiness cannot begin on the day the DIP is published. It has to begin before it.
Waiting is not a strategy.
For parts and component manufacturers, civil engineering and construction companies, and those involved in defence build programme delivery, the message should be clear: there is no need to wait for the plan to begin strengthening the foundations for delivery.
The direction of travel is clear. The platforms are largely committed. The programmes are outlined. The demand signal is visible. So is the constraint, and that is where industry needs to focus its attention, because that is the part it can control. We need to keep up so we’re not catching up.
Across the sector, there is work that can and should already be underway. Bottlenecks can be identified. Material flows can be mapped. Governance can be tightened. Visibility can be improved. Production constraints can be addressed in a measured way. Supplier readiness can be tested. Site logistics can be reviewed. Delivery models can be stress-tested against the pace and scale that future programmes will demand. The list goes on, none of which requires the final document in hand.
That is especially true when it comes to materials management, as operational outcomes depend on it, and yet we are seeing:
- Parts not where they need to be.
- Limited visibility of inventory.
- Delays in getting materials to site.
- Congested dockyards and shipyards, not due to lack of work, but due to lack of flow.
- Cost escalation that ultimately puts into question the affordability of capability intent.
Capability is not defined only by what government says it wants to buy. It is defined by what industry can actually produce at scale and sustain under pressure. Whether we are talking about submarines, ships, aircraft, munitions or infrastructure, operational readiness depends on a basic but demanding requirement: getting the right materials to the right place, at the right time, in the right condition.
Competitive advantage belongs to the ready.
The companies that act early will not arrive at the Defence Investment Plan asking what they need to put in place. They will arrive ready to respond because they have already built the capability to do so.
This is even more important in the current climate where programmes are likely to accelerate and where competition for skills, capacity and the ability to coordinate and deliver at pace will intensify.
At ASCO, we have seen repeatedly that fragmented supply, poor material visibility and weak governance quickly create pressure across cost, schedule and risk. The reverse is also true. Better control of supply, stronger materials management and more disciplined execution create resilience that is commercially valuable as well as operationally critical.
The Defence Investment Plan will matter. It should bring clarity and confidence. But it will not, on its own, build readiness. It will not remove the practical constraints already sitting in the system.
That work starts now.
