MOD Raid Landmine Fund to Pay BAe
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
MOD Raid Landmine Fund to Pay BAe
Grauniad: MoD plans raid on landmine removal fund to keep Tornados flying in Iraq
Money set aside to clear landmines and remove arms from conflict zones is to be raided to pay a private defence contractor to keep Tornado jets flying in Iraq, according to a confidential memo seen by the Guardian. The Ministry of Defence plans to pay BAE Systems from the multimillion-pound Conflict Prevention Fund - which covers projects such as destroying weapons in Bosnia and landmines in Mozambique - to subsidise the £5m-£10m cost of servicing each of the six planes.
The move follows a cost-cutting plan which has backfired for the MoD because of increased military action in Iraq.
The memo acknowledges that the emergency measure is needed because the MoD has closed its own state-of-the-art facility for servicing Tornado jets as a way of saving £500m over 10 years. A scaled-back facility is still not fully equipped for the job. Memos sent to ministers reveal that the ministry has decided to make the request to BAE Systems because the alternative facility, at RAF Marham in Norfolk, has "insufficient capacity".
The decision to close the fast jets and engines business of Dara, the Defence Aviation Repair Agency, based at St Athan, Glamorgan, from last April provoked a huge row in 2005. Trade unions, MPs and the all-party Commons defence committee condemned the move. At the time the committee concluded it was "perverse and wasteful for the MoD to invest large amounts of public money to renovate the facilities at RAF Marham when it has at its disposal a state-of-the-art facility at St Athan". The committee said: "It is doubtful that the facilities at RAF Marham will ever match those at Dara [in] St Athan."
A memo sent to Lady Taylor, the minister for defence equipment and support, reveals that the RAF has had to increase its operations in Iraq, and six Tornados have required servicing this year. "The net result is that there is insufficient capacity available at RAF Marham to meet the full requirements of the operational and training task," the memo says.
The memo proposes, and the minister accepts, that BAE Systems in Warton, Lancashire, should take over the work because it has a "gap" between completing an order for Saudi Arabia and new Tornado capability trials. It goes on: "The use of BAE Systems Warton will incur additional costs. BAE Systems are in the process of calculating these costs, but there is yet no timescale for their presentation to MoD. The additional monies will be subject of a claim against the Conflict Prevention Fund." The memo acknowledges there will be anger about the decision, which will attract "adverse comment from the unions". It adds: "Defensive news briefs are being developed to counter adverse media comment." Yesterday the Guardian showed the memo to the union Unite, which called for an inquiry by MPs on the defence committee and said it would seek an urgent meeting with the minister.
Ian Waddell, Unite's national officer, said: "We are angered and dismayed by the MoD's transfer of Tornado support to BAE Systems but not surprised. The decision to close a multimillion-pound, state-of-the-art facility and roll support forward to an ill-equipped RAF base was lunacy.
"It is now clear that everything we said has been vindicated. Unite maintained throughout the closure of Tornado support at Dara St Athan that RAF Marham could not cope with the work, and would fail to meet surge requirements. We believe parliament and the Commons defence select committee were misled over the closure of St Athan.
"Only a few weeks ago the government announced their decision to sell off helicopter support to Vector Aerospace, which we have warned could have serious consequences for the UK's battlefield helicopters. That decision looks even more ludicrous now that our concerns over fast jet support have proved to be true."
James Arbuthnot, Tory chairman of the defence committee, said yesterday: "We will consider holding an inquiry to see how the MoD have handled this and will also want to look into the wider issue that equipment in Iraq and Afghanistan is much more heavily used and what steps are the MoD taking to deal with this."
The MoD confirmed the decision. A spokeswoman said: "This is a short-term measure only, due to Tornados' increased use on operations. From April 2009 all Tornados will undergo depth maintenance at RAF Marham."
Money set aside to clear landmines and remove arms from conflict zones is to be raided to pay a private defence contractor to keep Tornado jets flying in Iraq, according to a confidential memo seen by the Guardian. The Ministry of Defence plans to pay BAE Systems from the multimillion-pound Conflict Prevention Fund - which covers projects such as destroying weapons in Bosnia and landmines in Mozambique - to subsidise the £5m-£10m cost of servicing each of the six planes.
The move follows a cost-cutting plan which has backfired for the MoD because of increased military action in Iraq.
The memo acknowledges that the emergency measure is needed because the MoD has closed its own state-of-the-art facility for servicing Tornado jets as a way of saving £500m over 10 years. A scaled-back facility is still not fully equipped for the job. Memos sent to ministers reveal that the ministry has decided to make the request to BAE Systems because the alternative facility, at RAF Marham in Norfolk, has "insufficient capacity".
The decision to close the fast jets and engines business of Dara, the Defence Aviation Repair Agency, based at St Athan, Glamorgan, from last April provoked a huge row in 2005. Trade unions, MPs and the all-party Commons defence committee condemned the move. At the time the committee concluded it was "perverse and wasteful for the MoD to invest large amounts of public money to renovate the facilities at RAF Marham when it has at its disposal a state-of-the-art facility at St Athan". The committee said: "It is doubtful that the facilities at RAF Marham will ever match those at Dara [in] St Athan."
A memo sent to Lady Taylor, the minister for defence equipment and support, reveals that the RAF has had to increase its operations in Iraq, and six Tornados have required servicing this year. "The net result is that there is insufficient capacity available at RAF Marham to meet the full requirements of the operational and training task," the memo says.
The memo proposes, and the minister accepts, that BAE Systems in Warton, Lancashire, should take over the work because it has a "gap" between completing an order for Saudi Arabia and new Tornado capability trials. It goes on: "The use of BAE Systems Warton will incur additional costs. BAE Systems are in the process of calculating these costs, but there is yet no timescale for their presentation to MoD. The additional monies will be subject of a claim against the Conflict Prevention Fund." The memo acknowledges there will be anger about the decision, which will attract "adverse comment from the unions". It adds: "Defensive news briefs are being developed to counter adverse media comment." Yesterday the Guardian showed the memo to the union Unite, which called for an inquiry by MPs on the defence committee and said it would seek an urgent meeting with the minister.
Ian Waddell, Unite's national officer, said: "We are angered and dismayed by the MoD's transfer of Tornado support to BAE Systems but not surprised. The decision to close a multimillion-pound, state-of-the-art facility and roll support forward to an ill-equipped RAF base was lunacy.
"It is now clear that everything we said has been vindicated. Unite maintained throughout the closure of Tornado support at Dara St Athan that RAF Marham could not cope with the work, and would fail to meet surge requirements. We believe parliament and the Commons defence select committee were misled over the closure of St Athan.
"Only a few weeks ago the government announced their decision to sell off helicopter support to Vector Aerospace, which we have warned could have serious consequences for the UK's battlefield helicopters. That decision looks even more ludicrous now that our concerns over fast jet support have proved to be true."
James Arbuthnot, Tory chairman of the defence committee, said yesterday: "We will consider holding an inquiry to see how the MoD have handled this and will also want to look into the wider issue that equipment in Iraq and Afghanistan is much more heavily used and what steps are the MoD taking to deal with this."
The MoD confirmed the decision. A spokeswoman said: "This is a short-term measure only, due to Tornados' increased use on operations. From April 2009 all Tornados will undergo depth maintenance at RAF Marham."
Without wishing to get into the rights and wrongs of the closure of DARA, the move to Marham etc, this may be "naughty" reporting by the Gaurdian. I may be wrong (and no doubt someone will soon let me know!) but I think you'll find the CPF is used to fund a lot more of all three of the Services current support to Iraq and Afg than to bail out the servicing of the Tornado. Without dipping into it we would be even further up the creek with even fewer paddles.
Further attempts to smear BAe I would suggest .... "children will have their limbs blown off because of BAe" etc etc
Further attempts to smear BAe I would suggest .... "children will have their limbs blown off because of BAe" etc etc
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: England
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Guardian headline rather misses the point. The real story here is not the "raiding" of the CP fund but the failure of the MoDs FJ maintenance policy. There is a brand-new £80m facility at St Athan that was purpose built for this task and then abandoned in an ill-conceived move to save money. The "roll-forward" scheme that moved maintenance to Marham and Cottesmore resulted in hundreds of job losses at DARA. This outcome was thoroughly predicted by those that opposed the move.
http://www.publications.parliament.u...57/557we03.htm
Will we see those politicians, officers and civil servants that made this decison held to account?
The super-hangar will be converted to offices and classrooms as part of the MoDs tri-service training PFI scheme.
http://www.publications.parliament.u...57/557we03.htm
Will we see those politicians, officers and civil servants that made this decison held to account?
The super-hangar will be converted to offices and classrooms as part of the MoDs tri-service training PFI scheme.
Before we get all excited about the "failure of the MoDs FJ maintenance policy" and use quotes from AMICUS (hardly an unbiased organisation) to justify outrage, how about an overview from a truly disinterested party, the National Audit Office:
http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/n.../0607825es.htm
A saving of £1.3 Billion over six years, with similar savings into the future ,compares pretty well with a short term "£5m-£10m" in my calculations. And while it may be the case that FJ maintenance is under pressure, I guarantee you that all was not sweetness and light when DARA did have the contract!
http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/n.../0607825es.htm
A saving of £1.3 Billion over six years, with similar savings into the future ,compares pretty well with a short term "£5m-£10m" in my calculations. And while it may be the case that FJ maintenance is under pressure, I guarantee you that all was not sweetness and light when DARA did have the contract!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: England
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok - maybe I should have said "failure to meet current requirements". As well as enthusiastically endorsing "Lean" ('nuff said), the NAO report regards the changes as representing good value for money - but it does go on to say:
Having to let an additional contract as an "emergency measure" and blaming the continued requirement for a handful of frames in the Iraq theatre has to be seen as some form of "failure". Since GW1 have we not had about the same number of jets in that theatre constantly? Hardly a surpise deployment.
I think that Amicus and those at DARA who lost their jobs have every right to be disgruntled.
Recommendation 1: The Department should improve its ability to provide the level of Service personnel contracted to work in the depth repair hubs at RAF Marham and RAF Cottesmore. The Department should also review if it has sufficient flexibility to meet operational contingencies.
I think that Amicus and those at DARA who lost their jobs have every right to be disgruntled.
