Revolving Doors – Revolving Rotors
Share by EmailChannel 4 News have reported this evening that the reason the MoD has delayed the £6 billion SAR-H PFI contract for UK Search and Rescue is because it is alleged that an MoD employee had fed the preferred bidder, Soteria, with confidential information and has since gone on to work for them.
Soteria is a consortium comprising the Canadian operator CHC, Sikorsky, Thales and the Royal Bank of Scotland (yes, the one the taxpayer owns)
If true, this is yet another scandal related to the revolving doors between the MoD and industry. There have been numerous allegations of a similar nature in the past and despite the various codes of contact would still seem to be a problem, the cosy relationship existing at many levels.
No doubt, the entire contract will have to be rebid or delayed further with the losers, AirKnight (Lockheed Martin UK, VT Group and British International Helicopters) perhaps taking part again. British International Helicopters currently service military contracts in the Falkland Islands and for Royal Navy Operational Sea Training.
It was reported that the MoD would pay two thirds of the costs and the Department of Transport, the balance. The contract was reportedly was designed and the service would have been a boost to capabilities, much better aircraft for example, S92′s instead of Sea Kings and AW139′s. However, some doubts were raised such as the the differences between the words capability and effectiveness when used to describe the level of service comparison between the existing and new.
Scheduled to start operation in 2012 the requirements included launch within 15 minutes during the day, within 45 minutes at night and be able to reach all ‘Very High Risk Areas’ and 75% of ‘Medium Risk Areas’ within 60 minutes, the service also had to have the ability to surge aircraft when required.
What do the coalition government say about PFI’s
Vince Cable MP said of PFI’s
“The whole thing has become terribly opaque and dishonest and it’s a way of hiding obligations. PFI has now largely broken down and we are in the ludicrous situation where the government is having to provide the funds for the private finance initiative”
Philip Hammond, Conservative Treasury spokesman, said
“If you take the private finance out of PFI, you haven’t got much left . . . if you transfer the financial risk back to the public sector, then that has to be reflected in the structure of the contracts. The public sector cannot simply step in and lend the money to itself, taking more risk so that the PFI structure can be maintained while leaving the private sector with the high returns these projects can bring. That seems to us fairly ridiculous.”
Surely the new government will see this as an opportunity to dispense with these derided instruments of pay now pay later as well.
No, thought not.
Category: Business and Politics
About the Author (Author Profile)
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!Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
And here’s me thinking that the story about SAR-H being binned because Prince William had spoken to Dave about it was true!
This PFI is the second worse PFI only eclipsed by tge FSTA. It makes no sense to introduce tge S92 when the Merlin is in use with the UK armed forces, and hence would ensure a steady supply of fully trained crews, has a much longer range and is ic course British. The RAF HC3/3a should be used and new build Merlins built that fully match the RM’s requirements.
Phil, just putting the final touches to the next post on the RAF which will look at FSTA
Wait out!
Call this a PFI piece? Pah!
How about a piece on the Defence Training Review?
Surely this is the moment that the RN should be pushing to take full control of SAR-H in the UK. A fleet of leased new build Merlins fitted out like the CH-149 Cormorant would mean a larger pool of a type of helicopter already in MOD Service and ensure that there were a large number of SAR-H bases around the UK where tired Merlin MH2s could operate from as they try to cover the work of the Nimrod MR4A from the far south west of the UK.
Few points -
The FT website broke the story before C4, they’ve been quite big on SAR-H for a while.
RBS is no longer part of Soteria, they walked at the end of last year when the inside job first came out. Hence the comment about PFI without the private finance.
On the Merlin thing – I get the whole commonality thing. On the other hand we know that a Merlin HC3 costs £19m upfront (and we need 24, so we need £456m from the tooth fairy) and has running costs of £34k/hour in total. I can imagine that even with economies of scale, we may be able to do cheaper than that with commercial helicopters. Taking naval blinkers off, the S-92 is used a lot in the oil industry, so it’s not as though there’s no pilots qualified in its use. The AirKnight bid was based on Super Pumas for which ditto, and there may be some Puma pilots becoming available?
The real risk is that they end up messing about with a new bid round, and we end up having to put more sticky-backed plastic over the Sea Kings. Apparently Yeovil did put forward a plan to bodge them together for another decade, but it would have cost a fortune.
In my view SAR should NOT be privatised. I think it would sit better with the military than the MCA! Better still make the MCA part of the MoD.
With a military SAR the Merlin makes perfect sense, as much as I dislike Wastelands, I would still rather buy British than American for this role.
As stated by a friend of mr Gladstone it makes sense for sharing resources and air crew.
Out of interest how much does a S-92 and it militarised version Superhawk cost? Plus does the Merlin’s third engine make them a better SAR platform?
Might a resonable alternative to all Merlin buy not be to buy S-92 for SAR and replace CHF with Superhawk?
Also is there any mileage in this story from August last year?
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/191959/Upgrade-may-keep-Sea-Kings-flying-Upgrade-may-keep-Sea-Kings-flying-
I do not understand the emotional attachment to Search and Rescue as a military role.
I do understand it provides an additional pool of trained aircrew, who can be rotated around other squadrons doing other tings – I get that. However I see that as the only benefit and I do not see any other good reasons to have the military undertaking a largely civilian role. Actually have said that I suppose its always a good recruiting tool – but a bloody expensive one.
Phil – bringing MCA under MoD would surely just make the MCA even more of a mess ? Because MoD is such a great ministry….
Tubby – third engine makes Merlin a better platform for many things, including bad weather, long range SAR. Also why on earth would we want to add yet another aircraft to our inventory for the CHF ?
El Sid – personally I don’t get the “Merlin commonality thing” but that is because I think mountain and maritime search and rescue should be a civilian responsibility.
Personally I have no issue with a private contractor providing services by the hour to the MCA for not just SAR but also surveillance, anti-drug and anti-illegal immigrant missions etc. I think there would could be benefits of using the Aw101 platform, but really don’t care if its S92 or Cougar / Super-Puma.
Of course it would be nice if it could actually be a well run contract, providing tax payer benefits, but that appears to be wishful thinking, like SAR Herc’s with refuelling pods and probe equipped helicopters to get right out into the Atlantic……..
I believe an argument against the Merlin was that it is too large to work in an around cliff faces in the Mountain Rescue role.
Ed Sid – “we need £456m from the tooth fairy” – I don’t think we do. I think MOD(N) lease 24 Merlin/Cormorant’s from AugustaWestland in the same manner the River Class OPVs and OPV(H) are leased from BVT with a contractor service for all but day to day maintenance. The revenue cost of that is clear and easy to see and since the cost of running the outstations is also measurable and obvious it should be possible to see how much the service costs for MOD(N) to run. Then the only uniformed personnel are aircrew and sufficient ground crew for day to day maintenance and aircraft handling.
John W the reason why tge Merlin was not selected was on running costs. A three engined helo simply costs more to run. With a fixed price contract the “for profit” consortium wanted to keep more of the money for themselves. If itches didn to the technical aspects if the helo I am pretty sure the Merlin would have won hands down.
The reason the military do SAR is I believe practise for Combat search and rescue. Along way from how the U.S does it but always better than nothing.
Saying that I see the Tornado that went down in the North Sea this week the crew was rescued by a civilian helo.
Forces doing SAR gives servicemen a home draft (or what ever the RAF equivalent is) that keeps their skills current and gives them a stable home life (meaning they stop in.)
Putting any emergency service in the hands of the private sector always seems a bit tacky to me.
I wonder if the RNLI should take it on?
Jimsw: “The reason the military do SAR is I believe practise for Combat search and rescue” – no it doesn’t, civvy mountain rescue and maritime SAR are completely different missions, I am sure there is some overlapping skill sets, but it is not an excuse to keep these capabilities in the military.
x: “Forces doing SAR gives servicemen a home draft (or what ever the RAF equivalent is) that keeps their skills current and gives them a stable home life (meaning they stop in.)”
I already acknowledged that, but is that enough? If you were to do a full on cost benefit analysis, would the provision of some home drafts (postings, billets, whatever) be enough to justify retaining this as a military capability ?
@ Peter Arundel
As an RNLI member (and occasional fund raiser) I think it would make a good job of running the service.
It should be remember before the NHS many hospitals were charities. And despite socialist propaganda to the contrary the poor received a good service. The people who “suffered” under that regimen were those who weren’t poor (enough) to access charity and not rich enough to go “private.”
In Spain I believe all the ambulances are run by charity; rather like a large St John’s.
We think too much in terms of private and public in this country.
I am not 100% sure there is much transfer of personnel between SAR and SH so the skills share argument becomes less powerful, I am with Jed on this, not sure there is a good enough reason for the MoD to keep it in house
@ Jed
Sorry I missed you saying that; I have said it before here too. Probably not on balance re SAR. Most RN personnel seem either to be always at sea or getting “extra” leave. There is no relief. There is a shortage of useful work ashore; sailors should be entitled to establish their life beyond the service; get married, be at home with kids. A high percentage of RAF personnel are always at “home”. It seems the Army rotates battalions more slowly than RN with ship’s companies; about six months away in 2 years (again that depends on your unit, I am sure it has been at least 2 years since our county regiment has been out to Afghanistan.)
I just like to point out issues beyond kit.
If SAR is just rescuing injured mountain walkers or kids swept out to sea on inflatables then private contractors are fine, but can you send them to a Mumbai terror attack call out or a damaged nuclear submarine?
Private pilots will have their hours restricted , service pilots can exceed them in emergencies. You may need more private pilots to provide the same cover as fewer military pilots.
There is no reason why government should not buy kit with a ten or fifteen year commercial loan.
If PFI competed against HP, we might get better PFI deals.
I think we need 18 RN CSAR Merlins for armed, dangerous tasks. Private contactors can do the remaining mundane stuff.
military personnel can’t strike or have an overtime ban! picky i know however but if it happened what would happen, forces standing in for what would be an emercency service, c’mon now that could never happen….
anyone seen my green goddess?
X – I know what your getting at, I had 3 shore drafts in 10 years, non of them more than 6 months long, compared to 5 ships, minimum of 18 months draft, all of them deployed for at least 6 months (in one go).
BUT having RN SAR helo’s would provide a very limited number of shore postings for a very limited number of WAFU’s, so I, again, I am just not sure it is worth it.
John H – I understand your comments, honestly, but what is the role of a specially equipped maritime SAR helo in a Mumbai scenario ? Why could not such a helo, manned by civillians fly out to a damaged nuke ? If it is for fear of a radiation leak, then send a HM2 with RN crew you can “order” into action.
I would truly love 18 CSAR Merlins as part of the CHM fleet, but it’s not going to happen is it.
Jed
In a Mumbai style attack there will be masses of phone calls & much confusion. Sorting out victims needing airlift from terrorists will be fraught. A contractor helicopter could be shot to bits. A RN CSAR helicopter can shoot back if need be.
Even if private pilots wanted to fly to a damaged nuclear sub, health & safety would probably stop them. No navy pilot would turn away from other sailors in danger.
18 CSAR Merlins are not on the agenda, but they should be.
Call me Dave said he would not give extra money to the EU, then folded & gave them an extra £400m pa extra from our taxes.
I would fund the 18 RN CSAR helicopters out of the extra DfID money. If they fold they can be deployed quickly (minus weapons) to natural disasters (floods, tsunamis, earthquakes)
John
I do see your point, but having spent 16 years in two branches of our military, I really do not EVER see an ROE situation where door mounted .50 cal are used in the UK ! Even if the aircraft itself was under fire. On accidentally dead civvy with a MOD(N) provided bullet removed during autopsy would likely bring down the government of the day….
If we had 400m extra, I still think there are other things that it would be spent on. Personally I would spend it on new, proper folding Merlins for CH force, I think we need generic transports that can do SAR tasking if required rather than the specialist capability.
Could the answer be the creation of a US style paramilitary Coast Guard, as I think Jed(?) suggested? If part or linked to the RFA/RN they could provide the maitaince/training of the helicopters and they could cross-train SAR techniques, boarding actions, etc. They could also be “posted” aboard RN/RFA ships for disaster relief missions, etc.
Another idea, already discussed on this excellent site, would be a modular “flying crane” version of the Merlin. Swap around the fuesulage modules for SAR, Medivac, transport,even back-up ASW? Normal role would be SAR and ther coastguard duties, but will be available as a strategic reserve for RN/AAC/RAF?
@ Gareth J
The RFA is a lot more military than many think. Many of its officers do the RN principal warfare officer course. They have to really because if the balloon went up they need an understanding of what the RN will do. I have even read of an RFA who did an exchange for a short period with RN and found himself as senior PWO for an entire task group (with other NATO navies.) We don’t need another service just move RN and Scottish FP over to the RFA. And just get Transport Police teams for law enforcement. Also the former revenue cutters could brought in under this umbrella from the UK border agency. On many blue ensign wearing vessels you find a bit of hodge-podge of civil servants from a variety of departments.
Jed
The army ended up using .50 cal in NI when the IRA started using drop side trucks as improv armoured vehicles. The precedent is there.
A 7.62mm machine gun for UK use might be more acceptable. A fabric cover could keep it out of sight, when not needed. Shame no one makes a .338 Lapua machinegun.
Some guy is alleged to have smuggled 60 modern Glock & Ruger pistols to Manchester villains. Britain is not the unarmed paradise, where the good guys do not need guns.
@ X – Sounds like a good idea but at present the RFA doesn’t operate aircraft/Helicopters (I think? Please correct if I’m wrong) so would they take over the SAR helicopters and even possibly maritime patrol? The main idea I was trying to suggest earlier was the new Coast Guard/RFA could lease out maintenance,etc, of SAR Merlin’s to the RN. However, they may have more in common with the RAF Merlin’s. In the end, whoever operates the Helicopters I can’t see how a private company with another helicopter type is going to be cheaper let alone better than one of the armed forces.
No the RFA doesn’t operate helicopters. Currently the Coastguard helicopter SAR is provided by an outside contractor called CHC. And their fixed wing aeroplanes by another who’s name escapes me.
You might be interested to know that it is HMG’s intention to cut the two emergency towing vessels. I was shocked until I found out that two vessels had been called out less than 5 times in the 8 or so years since they were introduced.
You might also like to have a google for the Norwegian Coastguard too.
@ X – Will do. Thanks for the tip.
Gareth said: “Could the answer be the creation of a US style paramilitary Coast Guard, as I think Jed(?) suggested?”
No, it was not me. Not against the principal, we just don’t have the cash, and never will. However, as others have responded above, I have previously suggested the RFA should run all para-military operations, e.g. Coast Guard, customs vessels etc etc.
Bottom line though, I do not have a problem with civvy contractors running SAR. I am sure the current PFI is probably as crap as the rest, and of course if we had a properly funded military, I have no objection with the RN keeping the role (I am in favour of removing all rotary wing from the RAF), but in a wild of finite resources, make civvy SAR tasking a civvy business.
So what’s wrong with AW139?
@ Jed – Sorry for the confusion, I was referring to your RFA proposal. As always, it all comes back to the money.
I’m with “A friend of Mr Gladstone” on this one, stick 30 merlins on layaway (10-15 year lease to buy) and use them to cover all rotorcraft requirements including those currently handled by the coastguard.
There is no escaping the fact that SAR duties for RN and RAF personnel are great training roles. These are skills are roles the services can not afford to just let die out. The ability to conduct high quality combat search and rescue may one day be called upon in a high demand and that is when the experience and knowledge will really be called up, and you can not put a price on skill/knowledge/experience!
Talking of civvy versus military, a senator has just suggested moving the US Coast Guard into the DoD as a cost-saving measure : http://www.navytimes.com/news/2011/01/coast-guard-rand-paul-defense-department-012811w/
I’ve just checked the numbers – the USCG is a bit bigger (by number of personnel) than the RN and Marines combined….
Well, ladies and gentlemen, the government has just puled the plug on the SAR PFI contract due to “irregularities in the bidding process” . . .
From what I read there is no news on what they are going to do next however!
http://www.theconstructionindex.co.uk/tenders/index/view/ref/2011%7CS%20135-225062
There appears to be a new tender for SAR Helicopters PFI.
The interesting things is the bases that are mentioned are the current ones used by the Coastguard SAR flights. The plot thickens……