HC Deb 13 March 1996 vol 273 cc649-53W
Mr. Wilson

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what plans he has for replacing the anti-oil pollution functions currently carried out from the RMAS depot at Fairlie; [19597]

(2) if he will list the dates on which the RMAS in-house team had discussions with his officials on the strategic implications of concentrating the buoys task at Pembroke and closing Fairlie; [19585]

(3) if he will make a statement on the implications of the RMAS market-testing exercise for the British underwater test and evaluation centre and associated civilian employment at Kyle at Lochalsh; [19586]

(4) what estimate he has made of the time which would be taken for personnel and equipment from Pembroke to arrive at the Clyde nuclear base in the event of an incident; [19587]

(5) on what grounds the lowest tender for the RMAS ports contract was rejected; and if he will make a statement; [19588]

(6) if the privatised parts of the RMAS functions will continue to be subject to royal charter; [19589]

(7) what estimate he has made of (a) the number of (b) the location of job losses resulting from the RMAS market-testing exercise; [19590]

(8) what was the value of investment by RMAS at (a) Pembroke and (b) Fairlie in each of the past five years; [19591]

(9) if he will postpone a final decision on the future of RMAS Fairlie pending an examination of the strategic implications of transferring the buoys task from it to Pembroke; [19592]

(10) if the will list the locations of moorings and navigation buoys currently serviced from the RMAS depot at Fairlie; [19593]

(11) if the bids from Denholm-Serco and Ocean Group in respect of the moorings and navigation buoys functions of the RMAS were predicted on the retention of north and south bases; and if he will make a statement; [19594]

(12) what consultations he has had with NATO concerning the proposed closure of the RMAS depot at Fairlie; [19595]

(13) when his Department was first informed of the proposal to close the RMAS depot at Fairlie, as part of the in-house bid for the moorings and navigation buoys functions of the RMAS. [19596]

Mr. Soames

The results of the market test of marine services announced on 28 February 1996,Official Report, columns 553–54, will involve the transfer of the upkeep and maintenance of moorings and navigation buoys from the NATO mooring and support depot—NMSD—Fairlie to the depot at Pembroke. There are no strategic grounds for postponing implementation of this decision and no discussions have been held with the in-house bid team on any such strategic implications.

The invitation to tender—ITT—did not oblige any bidders to use any of the existing MOD mooring maintenance facilities. The commercial bidders and the in-house bid team all elected to operate from one prime depot. The in-house bid team did not select to use NMSD Fairlie as a centre for its moorings and buoys bid. The Department was first made aware of this formally when bids were submitted in May 1995.

The relevant NATO authorities were informed of the market test's potential to affect the MOD's future involvement in NMSD Fairlie. Their long-term intentions in the light of the decision not to use the depot for moorings and navigation buoys work will now be sought. The provision of marine service support to the British underwater test and evaluation centre—BUTEC—at the Kyle of Lochalsh was not included in the ITT and the impact of the market test on this service is a matter for the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency, which operates the establishment.

The following 15 general locations of moorings and buoys are currently serviced from NMSD Fairlie:

  • Firth of Clyde
  • Isle of Skye
  • Hebrides
  • Kyle of Lochalsh
  • Rona and Raasay
  • Loch Ewe
  • Loch Eriboll
  • Cape Wrath
  • Carlingford loch
  • Luce bay
  • Firth of Forth
  • Ocean met buoys
  • Moray Firth and Aberdeen
  • Humber and the Wash
  • North sea met buoys.

No oil pollution control—OPC—equipment is held at NMSD Fairlie, but the depot has a contingency role in the Clyde port authority emergency plan as a mobilisation point and as a waterfront loading facility. This role will not be directly affected by the market test decision.

No special mooring equipment or personnel are retained at NMSD Fairlie to respond to incidents at HM naval base Clyde. Should mooring materials be required to support an incident at the base after the task has been transferred to Pembroke dock, the timing would very much depend on the size and amount of equipment involved and whether it could be shipped by road, rail or sea.

Investment at Pembroke and Fairlie over the past five years is as follows:

Pembroke

  • Financial Year 1993–94: £1.165 million
  • Financial Year 1994–95: £0.106 million
  • Financial Year 1995–96: £0.339 million

Of this sum £1.370 million was attributable to the closure of the central salvage depot, Swanmore.

Fairlie

  • Financial Year 1991–92: £0.031 million.

No part of the marine services is being privatised. The ports element will be Government owned and contractor operated—GOCO. The vessels required by the contractor will continue to be MOD-owned assets and will be operated under bareboat charter conditions, one of which requires the contractor to retain the same livery for the vessels and to fly the RMAS ensign.

The relatively minor cost advantage of the in-house team's bid for the ports contract was outweighed by the much greater potential cost to the MOD associated with the high risk nature of its non-complaint management proposals. The bid failed to achieve a single point of responsibility and accountability at each naval base. Furthermore, no acceptable system for tasking and prioritising marine services resources at each base had been developed.

It is estimated that approximately 500 posts will be surplus to requirements as a result of the market test. The precise details of the reductions have yet to be worked out, but their regional implications are expected to be in the order of 160 at Devonport, 120 at Portsmouth, 200 at Clyde plus 45 at the Bath HQ. Trade Union consultation has now commenced.

Dr. Godman

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) when he was first informed of the proposal to transfer functions and activities at present performed by vessels, their crews and other personnel located at RMAS Greenock; and if he will make a statement; [19844]

(2) how many (a) men and (b) women were employed at RMAS Greenock in each of the past 10 years; [19845]

(3) if he will postpone a final decision on the future of RMAS Greenock until the completion of an analysis of the strategic and financial consequences of the transfer of functions and employment away from RMAS Greenock; [19846]

(4) which (a) marine services and (b) other activities will continue to be performed by vessels and personnel based at RMAS Greenock, following his decision concerning the marine services market test; and if he will make a statement; [19847]

(5) what guarantees he has sought concerning the continuity of employment and utilisation of (a) vessels, (b) personnel and (c) physical facilities at RMAS Greenock; [19848]

(6) what estimates he has made of the number of jobs which will be lost at RMAS Greenock as a result of his decision concerning the marine services market test; and if he will make a statement; [19849]

(7) if he will list the functions undertaken by RMAS vessels operating out of Greenock in relation to the operations of nuclear submarines in and close to the firth of Clyde; and if he will make a statement; [19850]

(8) on how many occasions RMAS vessels operating out of Greenock have been called to the collisions, near-collisions and other incidents involving (a) nuclear submarines and fishing vessels, (b) conventional submarines and fishing vessels and (c) nuclear and conventional submarines and other vessels in and close to the firth of Clyde in each of the past 10 years. [19851]

Mr. Soames

Ministers gave careful consideration to the results of the marine services market test in the weeks leading up to the announcement on 28 February 1996,Official Report, columns 553–54, that the contract for the provision of ports services have been awarded to the private sector consortium, Denholm-SERCO, and the remaining moorings/buoys and armament freighting contracts had been awarded to the in-house team.

The impact of this decision on RMAS Greenock will involve the transfer of moorings/buoys and associated diving activities currently performed there to Pembroke dock, which the in-house team proposes to use as the centre of this task in future. Two vessels, Salmoor and Salmaster, currently based at RMAS Greenock will be affected by this transfer.

Under the management of Denholm-SERCO, RMAS Greenock will continue to provide the full range of marine services under the ports contract to the Clyde area. This will include support to the operations of nuclear submarines in and close to the firth of Clyde, full details of which are classified. No strategic or financial reason is seem to postpone the implementation of the market test at RMAS Greenock, which is expected to lead to significant savings.

Not all of the vessels and personnel currently employed on ports-related tasks will be required under the terms of the new contract. It is too early to estimate how many posts and vessels at RMAS Greenock would be surplus to requirements. This will be the subject of detailed discussions between the Department, Denholm-SERCO and the work force over the coming weeks. Continuity of employment would be provided under the terms of TUPE regulations. It will be subject to full consultation with the work force and its trade union representatives. The utilisation of vessels and facilities would be subject to Denholm-SERCO's requirements. MOD vessels required would be transferred under commercial leasing arrangements and the company intends to operate from the existing great harbour support base making use of most of the buildings.

The number of employees at RMAS Greenock is currently estimated to be some 252.2, of whom some 12.5 are women. It is not possible to provide the information on employment levels in each of the preceding 10 years and the ratio of men and women employed since data are not held centrally in this format and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. Similarly, the details of RMAS vessels called out to collisions or other incidents in the Clyde area in each of the past 10 years is not readily available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. However, it would be standard practice in an emergency involving a collision between an MOD and a commercial vessel for any marine service vessel able to assist to be directed to do so. This would continue to be the case following the market test.