Tourist, are you suggesting we need to see proof before we provide something? I understand cost v fatalities is a consideration, but the total hindsight approach to risk management is not the answer... but then again you might get away with it
I'm not saying we need an MPA for FW SAR. But IMO the platforms and level of cover provided at the moment are not adequate to cover the FW SAR task adequately (A nice perk of owning an MPA fleet was that it could pick up SAR virtually free).
We now have a situation of no dedicated assets and no stated plan to fill or even address the gap in the future. Even the intention to buy something would be encouraging e.g. MCA to purchase 3 Aircraft for medium FW SAR (CN-235, Fokker 60 etc.)
Here's thought, allegedly Cameron has gone against the advice of his defence chiefs, SoS for defence and the DoT (I understand they were concerned with our ability to cover our internationally agreed commitment). Now if there is a fatality and it could be proved that a lack of or inadequate FW SAR cover contributed, could he be guilty of Corporate Manslaughter? Just because he is in a position of power shouldn't mean he can't be held to account just like a CEO, etc.