A SCOTTISH MP has called for rethink on the government’s policy of building vital defence assets abroad after the Ministry of Defence (MoD) splashed out on business-class tickets for the Lady Sponsor of a naval ship being built in South Korea to travel there for its naming ceremony.
Douglas Chapman said the cost of flights for Anita Lister and her husband Vice-Admiral Simon Lister for the naming of the Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA) Tiderace was £4,820.
He said this raised more questions about the wisdom of awarding the contract for Military Afloat Reach and Sustainability (MARS) vessels to a South Korean yard.
Tiderace’s sister ship RFA Tidespring has been beset with technical problems and delays – as defence minister Harriet Baldwin had admitted under questioning from the Dunfermline and West Fife MP.
Chapman told The National: “I’m glad someone got to enjoy the bizarre decision of the MoD to build these ships abroad – although it is just a shame the taxpayer is having to pick up the bill for this junket.
“The fiasco of these MARS tankers, which I have been documenting with questions asked to government ministers, shows why the MoD must bring the contract for the next Fleet Solid Support ships home and reward the workforce in Rosyth – a site which, after building the Queen Elizabeth carriers on time and on budget, has a proven record of providing maximum taxpayer value for Royal Navy projects.”
HMS Queen Elizabeth is unusual because it is being built through an alliance between Babcock, Thales, BAE Systems and the Ministry of Defence – known as the Aircraft Carrier Alliance.
Six UK shipyards are involved, including the Rosyth and Clyde yards.
Of the 8,000 people working on the project UK-wide, 3,000 are in Rosyth, and Chapman said he was trying to raise the yard’s profile for when the carrier project was completed.
“There are three Royal Fleet Auxiliary ships to be built as part of the same group being built in Korea, so what we’re trying to do is get these ships built at Rosyth, Scotstoun and Govan, and at other yards around the UK,” he said.
“We’d like to see Rosyth get some benefit beyond the carriers – giving Rosyth a reward for the fact that they’ve pulled together two of the Navy’s biggest ever shipbuilding projects.
“The first, the Queen Elizabeth, is almost ready to go to sea trials next year.
“So the fact that they have worked so hard and pulled this together we can’t allow them not to get something from it for future work, and the RFA ships would be an ideal way forward should Rosyth want to bid for the work – which I’m sure they would – either in whole or in part.”
Chapman said the decision to build the RFA vessels in South Korea was mainly financial, but the project had experienced problems and delays.
“The delays have been longer than anticipated and there have been problems with the ships themselves,” he said.
“On the face of it they seemed like a good buy, but when you buy something in a shop there might be a discount and you get what you pay for, basically.
“What we’re saying is: bring the RFA ships back to Rosyth to make sure they are built to a quality that is standard in Scotland.”
Chapman had questioned Baldwin about problems with the Tidespring, whose transfer to the UK for customisation and assessment trials has been delayed until next year.
She replied that finalising elements of electrical design and insulation installation had resulted in some “adjustments in the build schedule”.
However, she said the vessel was expected to arrive in the UK in early 2017.
Chapman also promised that if Rosyth did receive its “reward”, he would foot the transport bill for the naming ceremony.
He said: “I can assure the minister that I’d be glad to pick up the return bus fare for any potential Lady Sponsor for these ships from Edinburgh Airport to Rosyth.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel