- Defence policy
- Equipment and support
- Modernising defence
- Aviation
- Marine
- Land vehicles
- Security
- HR and training
- Defence estates (DIO)
News updates
Twitter updates
Facebook
Email
Print
Cable probes future tanker deal
13 July 2010Business Secretary Vince Cable has submitted a detailed cost analysis of the £10.5bn future strategic tanker aircraft contract for consideration as part of the Strategic Defence and Security Review(SDSR), it has been confirmed.
Earlier this week, Cable told The Sunday Times that a "very well informed source" had given him "detailed information on massively expensive and unnecessary commitments" involved in the programme.
The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) has since confirmed that Cable has passed the costings dossier on to the MoD and repeated calls for a "fuller investigation" into the deal.
"Vince Cable was provided with a dossier analysing the costings of the project," a BIS spokeswoman said. "In recent weeks he has passed the dossier of information to the Ministry of Defence and Treasury."
The spokeswoman did not say who provided Cable with the dossier, but said that it had been passed directly to "the authorities who are reviewing this project as part of the Strategic Defence Review".
Under the 27-year deal, the RAF will lease 14 converted Airbus A330 tanker aircraft from the AirTanker consortium, led by EADS and also including Cobham, Rolls-Royce, VT Group and Thales.
When the deal was finalised it was announced that it would create 600 jobs and safeguard a further 3,000.
The Sunday Times reported that if the MoD were to cancel the contract it would have to pay any redundancy costs as well as a penalty of £75m per aircraft.
An AirTanker spokeswoman said the MoD gave the deal final approval "with a full understanding of all the costs and risks of this deal and the alternatives."
HAVE YOUR SAY
13 July 2010
Buy outright 14 to the same standard as the RAAF. Would probably save at least £1 billion while providing aircraft of a higher standard to the RAF.
We should investigate criminal procedings against those involved with this PFI.
John Hartley - Woking/Surrey/UK
14 July 2010
That would be Gordon Brown and all the Labour Defence ministers then
Ian Skinner - Enfield
14 July 2010
Yet another piece of evidence to support the theory that the last habitues of Downing Street were living in cloud cuckoo land and the MOD (RAF) have no knowledge of the business world where profit is the only motivation!
Norman - UK
14 July 2010
It is hard to see how 14 new generation tankers will replace the existing force.
The fact the RAF don't own the aircraft is a disgrace, there is even talks of sharing with the French...
The previous government should hold their collective heads in shame, they have failed on a grand scale (the only thing they in hindsight did well).
Shaun - Ex-RNZN
28 July 2010
It was announced yesterday that the '£1,25 Billion, "contingency fund" set aside for the London Olympics' may not be required and the funds could be returned to the Treasury. Good news indeed (if true) but how much will security for the Games cost? However prestigious such an event might be, who benefits outside the S.E of the UK? Very few I expect. Meanwhile as BP reels from the rather one sided penalties imposed by the US Government (remember Bophal, 'Agent Orange' and lately 'Goldman Sachs')should our navy and air force still rely on outdated means of refuelling? The VC10 still soldiers on until a replacement is fully confirmed, while the RFA has just two 'double hulled' tankers (often making up for absent warships!)the remainder being 30 to 40 year old, single hulls, conveniently 'exempted' from current legislation! It's a disaster waiting to happen. All our forces depend on secure fuel supplies, yet the MARS project at least seems to have been conveniently forgotten about. Once the world's greatest shipbuilder, aside from a few naval vessels, the UK no longer builds ships. Not one of the 30 odd replacement SD/RMAS craft have been built in the UK! Surely UK yards could still complete standard commercial hulls built abroad as the Dutch and others so capably do. They must be replaced sooner or later, surely it would save in the long term while preserving valuable skills and jobs into the bargain?
Imagine the outcry if the Olympic sailing contest was disrupted by an oil spill from a RAS accident off Weymouth!! It strikes me this country needs to get its priorities sorted out, I expect Shaun (Ex RNZN) is glad he's a 'Kiwi'!!
Neil - Merseyside, UK