SERCo running NATS is a little like the fly swallowing the elephant but in the end they have the capability of doing the job safely, efficiently and above all cost effectively.
In order to accomplish the task the whole business needs an overhaul, something that the government recognized, but wasn't willing to do itself so it opted for privatisation and hoped somebody else would sort out the mess. Having little or no experience in ATC management the airline group, the winning bidder, has failed to carry out these reforms.
Before you all get on your high horses I'm not talking about reforming ATC standards, which I know are second to none, but all those costly peripheral perks, jollies, meetings, cars, early goes, standby shifts, etc. Even the most vehement anti privatisation critics must agree these exist. There's also the little matter of excessive layers of middle management. This is where SERCo shines as these layers are cut out as power is devolved down to unit level wherever this is possible whilst maintaining standards and yes, that dirty word profitability.
As is was SERCo were kept out of the running by a campaign of misinformation lead by those that should know better. One major point of misinformation was a supposed decline in ATC standards that would result from SERCo cost cutting. This was total rubbish as it presumed that the independent regulator, SRG, would watch quietly on the sideline.
SERCo is better off without NATS and as far as I can see will stay right away from any so-called take-over bid. That does not mean they will not be invited to participate in assisting with NATS management and they will no doubt accept if the price is right.
NATS will be all the better off if this happens.
