Originally Posted by
Neo380
That’s fine, if you want to run the National Airspace System (which is defined at ‘critical national infrastructure’ btw) on manual every time your computer trips out, then no issues.
But when you come back to the public purse (as you will, despite what you might read here) and ask for £1bn+ for a new system ‘for the safe and smooth running of the UK’s CNI’, expect to be reminded of what you said.
Btw, this is the same organisation that in RP3, so only a couple of years ago, said ‘accepting any performance improvements (the point of reporting periods!) was against the business’s and national interest’.
If I was on the Parliamentary Committee I would ensure that sort of comment (and several of the above) was recorded as ‘breathtakingly arrogant!’
So this future demand on the public purse is invented by you? The last £1bn didn't come from the public purse so why should the next?
If anything like last time I would expect the Committee to be hell bent on making sound bites most of which have no relevance to the situation rather than actually discussing the issue at hand. Last time they continually demanded the CEO promise something nether he nor anybody else could promise and contrived to get him replaced when he stuck to the only realistic response.
The RPs are a negotiation between multiple parties and I'd expect NATS to forcefully fight its corner. You might consider that arrogant but actually as directors of a PLC the board is probably legally required to do so.
As I said before once the safety case is established the rest is a business matter. It maybe CNI but the decision as to what investment happens is part of the licence negotiations and in each case so far the customers, ie the airlines, have been offered options with more resilience and after, predictably, initially demanding low prices and more resilience have tended towards lower cost. If you don't want those who pay to define your CNI you need to give the Regulator different powers.
If Monday was a result of the failure of an old system then the initial report next week might include some information on the investment to date, why that system is still in use, and current plans and timescales for replacement.