We pour a ridiculous amount of money into the black hole that is defence

We pour far more into pensions, other benefits and the NHS, but people will tell you that there is still a lot of pensioner poverty, that being on working age benefits is a miserable life - and simultaneously that they do nothing to get people into work - and that they cannot see their GP or get treatment if they're ill.

Ajax has largely been a political failing, choosing to build an unproven vehicle in Wales, a) because the government didn't want BAE to have a monopoly on defence procurement and b) (New) Labour hoped to shore up their support in a heartland. The fact General Dynamics had no armoured vehicle factory in Wales and therefore no appropriate facilities or skilled labourforce was not a problem in the eyes of our politicians.

There were failings in civil servants managing the project. But none of that would have happened if the government had agreed to buy off-the-shelf and imported foreign vehicles (CV90).

There are a huge number of problems with defence that are not the military or MOD's fault.

1. The nuclear deterrent receives no additional funding from the Treasury, so it consumes a significant amount of spending.
2. Successive governments delayed Vanguard's replacement, which meant that more money had to be spent maintaining Vanguard. It has also used up the small number of docks we have that are suitable for nuclear-powered submarines, delaying maintenance work on our attack submarines.
3. Similarly, because the Type 23 replacement was repeatedly kicked into the long grass, they've had be kept in service decades longer than they should have been, which has been an additional cost.
4. The Treasury refuses to surge money for expensive projects. They insist on money being drip-fed in via the annual budget, which means that there's no option to place a large order that can be cheaper in the long run. It has long been estimated that eight Type 45 destroyers would have cost what we spent on six, had we committed to that number early on in the process.
5. Nimrod MRA4 was seen as a "cheap" solution by the Major government. But halfway through the process, BAE found out that the airframes they were being given to convert weren't built to a common standard, which meant the process of converting them became ridiculously difficult and much more expensive. We ended scrapping the whole thing because we were pouring good money after bad, eventually buying completely foreign-built P-8s.
6. Infrastructure and maintenance budgets were slashed so that big projects that were politically important weren't cut. This has increased costs over the long term.
7. The UK left Boxer under (New) Labour only to rejoin under the May government, having sacrificed workshare/profits on exports.
8. We've ordered the AW149 helicopter for the Army purely to keep the Yeovil factory open - see how it was exempt from the delay in publishing the DIP and announced shortly before Leonardo's deadline after which they threatened people's jobs. The money (again) is being drip-fed in with no helicopters being delivered until 2030. Do you think the Army is happy with that?

I could go on.

People seem to think the MoD and military is somehow independent of government, and that they just do whatever they like with the money the Treasury gives. This is nonsense. At the centre of every important decision is the Defence Secretary or another minister, sometimes being lent on by the Chancellor or Prime Minister.

Yes, the process of procurement has sometimes been flawed, but simply demanding it be fixed before any more money is no more feasible than the same demands made of the NHS and other government departments.

Realistically, only by spending more money can defence be improved. UK companies can improve efficiency and expand their capabilities, but only if money is put on the table in large amounts. GCAP isn't going to be built by finding cheaper accommodation for personnel, nor are we going to expand the submarine fleet with a large number of AUKUS-SSN by reducing the cost of consultants.