Why is this massive PFI to be imposed on Wales?

formal response.doc
91K Download View as HTML

Annex FOI Request 3132.doc
49K Download View as HTML

Sodexo annnouncement: DTR programme.txt
6K Download

Sodexo backgrounder.txt
5K Download

Annex FOI Request 3132 - Metrix PFI project

1. Why is this massive PFI to be imposed on Wales?

The PFI in question is a Ministry of Defence project. The Welsh Assembly Government has endorsed this investment as a major opportunity for Wales and the South East Wales regional economy. It will complement our plans for the development of an Aerospace Business Park on the St Athan site. Accordingly, the Assembly Government actively promoted the site to potential bidders and we welcome this significant investment in jobs and engineering skills training in Wales.

2. When is there going to be a debate in the Assembly about the St

Athan Metrix PFI?

The First Minister made an oral statement in the Senedd on 17 January 2007. Since then, Assembly Members have on several occasions raised with Ministers the development proposals for St Athan during oral questions in the Senedd. It should be noted that public input on the development proposals for St Athan has been actively sought from the beginning, firstly through the St Athan Development Brief which was published in July 2006 following public consultation; and the current round of public consultation events which commenced last summer and is continuing through to Spring of this year. Further information about the public consultation is available at www.st-athanconsultation.co.uk.

3. Is the DTR PFI on the brink of collapse and have AMs and WAG

questioned the viability of the project?

Questions about the financial viability of the Defence Training Review Package 1 programme are a matter for the Ministry of Defence as sponsors of the project. Plans for the St Athan Development Scheme, which include the Defence Technical College and an Aerospace Business Park, are being actively pursued. Public consultation events on the draft plans are currently on-going to help inform the planning applications which are expected to be submitted in early May 2009.

Request for information about the activities of Assembly Members should be addressed to the National Assembly for Wales Commission, Cardiff Bay, Cardiff, CF99 1NA.

4. What amount and from which sources is taxpayer's money involved?

How much of this is coming from Wales?

Funding for the Defence Technical College is a matter for the Ministry of Defence to whom questions about this public private partnership programme should be addressed. The Welsh Assembly Government is facilitating the St Athan development, including our plans for an Aerospace Business Park, through land assembly and the provision of infrastructure. As there will be shared use of infrastructure, arrangements are currently being negotiated with the Ministry of Defence for the proportionate repayment of costs. At this stage therefore the funding attributable to Wales has yet to be agreed. I will write to you with the funding implications for Wales as soon as agreement has been reached.

5. Have the Welsh Assembly Government been briefed on the latest

funding situation since the withdrawal of LST?

The funding of the Package 1 DTR programme is a matter for the Ministry of Defence and Metrix. The Assembly Government has noted the announcement by Metrix of a new equity partner to replace LST.

6. Will Metrix make up cash shortfall by training private armies,

regardless of their human rights record, and is there anything the

WAG or AMs can do to stop them doing that?

The question concerns the operational arrangements for the new Defence Technical College and as such should be addressed to the Ministry of Defence and the Metrix consortium.

7. Why has the St Athan consultation website not been updated and

why is still no feed back from the consultations that have already

taken place as long ago as July 2008.(http://www.st-athanconsultation.co.uk/)

The website has now been updated and contains detailed information about the consultation programme to date, including the analysis from the summer/autumn 2008 events. I am sorry it has taken longer than we expected. I should explain that it wasn't until November/December that the analyses, involving fairly detailed comments in some cases, could begin as the feedback period for the public to submit comments did not close until end October. It remains our intention to post on the web site as quickly as possible a report of the workshops and interest group meetings held this year. I would encourage you to contact the consultation helpline - 0845 6160016 or e-mail xxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xx.xx - if you have any specific questions about any aspect of the proposed development.

8. How much is the WAG contributing toward this consultation?

The public consultation concerns the St Athan Development Scheme, which broadly comprises the Defence Technical College and plans to create a new Aerospace Business Park. The latter is being developed by the Welsh Assembly Government and we have therefore agreed to contribute approximately £85,600 towards the overall costs of the public consultation.

9. Visitors to the DTA exhibition complained of a “lack of detailed

information”. Have the issues raised there been addressed? Will the academy be an “isolated, gated village“? Would nearby towns see an increase in “squaddie rowdiness and drop outs from the academy”?

It was made clear from the outset and explained to those attending the exhibitions that the master plans was still evolving and therefore many of the details had still to be agreed. The public consultation events provide scope for local residents and the public to influence the emerging site plans. Follow up workshops and interest group meetings have been held to discuss the sort of issues you have raised, for example the Community Welfare Interest Group held on 4 March addressed, amongst other things, how military and civilian populations will integrate and issues around site security and access for civilians. A report on this event will be published on the consultation website in due course.

10. In related news `Wales on Line' reports - £100m plus plan that

is being considered, to build a new road to Cardiff International

Airport: It has been suggested that the road would be to serve the

St Athan training academy. is this true? Would it not be an outrage to spend such huge amounts of Welsh public money on feather-bedding the training academy project?

The airport link road study is a completely separate exercise and does not form part of the plans for the St Athan development. Clearly however, improvements to the road network to the airport from the M4 could also benefit the St Athan development given its close proximity to the airport. When developing proposals, the airport link road study team has to take cognisance of the planning status of various developments which could impact on the study. The teams working on these two sets of proposals are therefore liaising closely to ensure that the relevant improvements to road links in the Vale are considered in a joined up way.

11. Why should Welsh taxpayers subsidise private organisations?

The Defence Technical College is a Ministry of Defence Public Private Partnership project. The Welsh Assembly Government is investing in new infrastructure at St Athan as part of our plans to develop an Aerospace Business Park.

12. How many meetings have AMs had with Metrix officials?

The Welsh Assembly Government does not hold information on meetings held by Assembly Members. Request for information about the activities of Assembly Members should be addressed to the National Assembly for Wales Commission, Cardiff Bay, Cardiff, CF99 1NA.

13. As a new partner Sodexo is involved in a much greater capacity, what information have the WAG got or asked for about this company?

The consortium structure is a matter for Metrix. The Metrix consortium informed us on 10 February 2009 about the announcement that it had secured a new partner - copies of the relevant e-mails are attached.

Sodexo - key strengths!

1.  Member of the consortium from the beginning:


* Know the project well so we don't need to start from scratch - can transition easily
* We know each other well which is good from a relationship perspective



2.  Bring extensive experience in the PFI and PPP projects including the UK:

* No of significant PFI contracts in the UK: 17 and aggressively looking to grow portfolio across healthcare, defence, education, prisons
* Total value of PFI contracts in the UK in last financial year (August 2008): £221m pounds in annual service turnover, which equates to 20 per cent of UK turnover
* Significant long-term contracts - approx average length of contract: 30 years
* Provide a wide range of services, including design, construction, management and funding.



PFI examples:

* Queens Hospital, Romford - £18m pa in turnover. Fully integrated facilities management to one of the largest acute hospital trusts in England [serving a population of around 750,000]
* HMP Addiewell, Scotland - projected annual turnover of £17.5m when fully operational. Kalyx, the correctional arm of Sodexo, awarded contract to design, construct, manage and fund Scotland's first new prison for almost ten years housing 750 prisoners



3.  They know the MOD very well


* understand MOD ethos and military culture
* eg Colchester Garrison - turnover £18m pa.  £2bn contract to provide working and living accommodation for more than 4,200 military and civilian staff, including the construction of over 130 buildings.



4.  Property experience but service provision more important anyway


* eg 3 prisons and over 130 buildings at Colchester
* Property relatively straightforward - we wanted their expertise in service delivery


5.  Financially sound multinational company:


* UK and Ireland - 43,000 employees providing food and facilities management service at over 2,300 locations
* part of the Sodexo Group, the number one global provider of food and facilities management services, with more than 355,000 employees at more than 30,000 sites in 80 countries.
* strong balance sheet / cash

Christopher Moseley

Metrix UK

Second Floor

10 Great George Street

London SW1P 3AE

Tel. +44 7941 126064

Email: xxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxx@xxxxxxxx.xxx

From Glascoed to Gaza: Welsh Assembly government implicated in Israeli war crimes

From Glascoed to Gaza: Welsh Assembly government implicated in Israeli war crimes

RAYTHEON, Sodexo, Qinetiq are coming to St Athan Wales to set up a school for mercenaries, and whoever else they like - lets put a stop to it now!

The aftermath of Israeli attacks in Gaza

As Palestinian survivors of the Israeli onslaught in Gaza huddle in the ruins of their devastated communities, it will be cold comfort to them to know that the weapons used against them have

been developed - in part - in a country proud to be committed to a sustainable future: Wales. While the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) talks of having “a real part to play in influencing change at home and on the international stage”, the truth is that Welsh taxpayers’ money is being used to subsidize the arms industry in Wales - an arms industry that is deeply implicated in Israeli war crimes in Gaza.

Israeli Hermes 450

The Israeli military employ UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) to target Palestinian homes, schools and hospitals. These are the Hermes 450, made by the Israeli firm Elbit Systems, using engines built in Birmingham. The pilotless drones are then brought to Parc Aberporth in west Wales for testing. This facility has been supported by £8.7m in grants from the WAG.

Israeli Apache attack helicopter

Once the “targets” have been identified, next come the bombs. The Israeli military use Apache attack helicopters, which Palestinian human rights activists have described as “a symbol of indiscriminate military violence.“ The Apaches rely on transformers made by Penny & Giles Controls of Cwmfelinfach, Gwent. Then there are the F-16 fighter jets, using components made by BAE Systems, which operates a munitions factory in Glascoed and runs a military training school in Cwmbran. These same jets bombed the Shij’ia Family Health Care Centre in Gaza , which runs a mobile dental clinic wholly funded by the people of Wales through the Near East Council of Churches.

The ruins of the health care centre

Incredibly, the health care centre was telephoned 15 minutes in advance by the Israelis to warn them that they would be attacked - no case of “collateral damage” there then.

Of course the Welsh arms industry doesn’t end there. With over 180 companies in the aerospace sector in Wales, we are now home to the likes of General Dynamics and Raytheon, makers of tanks, submarines, bombs, rockets and much much human misery. If only these companies would get together in one room so outraged Welsh taxpayers could show what they think of them… Well, quit dreaming. All of these and more will be attending the Aerolink Wales 2009 exhibition, to be held at the Vale Hotel in Cardiff, on 7th April this year.

UAV Engines Ltd, Lynn Lane, Shenstone, Lichfield, WS14 0DT. Tel: 01543 481819. uav@uavenginesltd.co.uk

Penny & Giles Controls, 36 Nine Mile Point Ind. Est., Cwmfelinfach, Gwent NP11 7HZ Tel: 01495 202000. sales@pennyandgiles.com

BAE Systems Land Systems Munitions, Usk, Monmouthshire, NP15 1XL. Tel: 01291 672211.

BAE Systems: Cwmbran Training College, Beacon House, William Brown Close, Llantarnam Park, Cwmbran, Gwent. Tel: 01633 835123. trainingcollege@baesystems.com www.cwmbrancollege.com/

www.aerolinkwales.co.uk The Vale Hotel, Hensol Park, Hensol, Vale of Glamorgan, CF72 8JY. Tel: 01443 667800. www.vale-hotel.com

Original article here

What cost privatisation?

Chris Ames, a freelance writer and investigative journalist, is editor of iraqdossier.com

What cost privatisation?

Posted by Chris Ames Thursday, 22 January 2009 at 12:26 pm

With the chancellor committing further billions of public money to bail out the banks, why are ministers so determined to push through an “unaffordable” privatisation that lost its rationale with the credit crunch?

As I describe today on my Spin and Spinners blog, ministers have repeatedly misled MPs about the escalating costs of the defence training review (DTR).

If it goes through, which some doubt, the DTR would be new Labour’s biggest ever private finance initiative (PFI) project. Its main element, giving a consortium led by arms companies a 30-year contract to build and run a specialist military academy in Wales, was already controversial. Then increased borrowing costs and falls in the value of surplus Ministry of Defence land pushed the cost of “package 1” of the DTR up to £12bn.

The National Audit Office recently disclosed that this “significant cost growth” led the MoD to deem the project “unaffordable” last May. But accident-prone Armed forces minister Bob Ainsworth has repeatedly claimed that it provides savings to the taxpayer.

Ainsworth was told last April of the £1bn increase that took the cost of the package to £12bn, making it unaffordable. A week later he stated in a written parliamentary answer that it provided savings of approximately £400 million over 30 years.

On 3 November, Ainsworth told MPs that “the programme is still affordable and remains more affordable than the in-house alternative”. The MoD subsequently disclosed under the freedom of information act that the cost of the programme remained at £12bn. It has also emerged that the MoD had by then developed a new in-house “fallback” proposal, which it has deemed both “affordable and deliverable”.

In their statements about the DTR, both Ainsworth and the MoD keep saying that they have worked hard to drive down costs. But, given that the price is still what it was when the project was “unaffordable”, have they actually cut anything off the price? Here’s a statement from an MoD spokesperson:

“The bottom line is that [the project] is affordable. The MOD and Metrix have over the last few months and continue to work constructively together to drive down costs without materially affecting the scope of the project. You can’t solely focus on the cost, affordability also incorporates the fact that [the project] is now the best value for money for the taxpayer.”

The spokesperson declined to deny that the MoD has simply increased its funding for the project to ease its affordability issues.

In a letter to tory MP Mark Pritchard, Ainsworth sought to backtrack from his assertion that the PFI option was “more affordable than the in-house alternative”. He appears to have realised what a reckless claim it was to make in the middle of negotiations. He told Pritchard that information on the costs of the in-house option:

“underpins our negotiating position with Metrix, and its disclosure would hinder the MoD’s ability to achieve value-for-money”.

But why is the government so determined to push through an unaffordable privatisation that is no longer the cheapest option and only ever worked because the private sector had access to relatively cheap finance?

The Metrix consortium includes arms companies Qinetiq and Raytheon, as well as training bodies City and Guilds and the Open University. There was already bitter opposition to what John Pilger described as “a British school of the Americas” – a reference to the notorious US college for latin American death squads.

There has been speculation that Qinetiq – the company spun out of a branch of the MoD – is struggling to make money. Having set it up, does the government feel obliged to throw it the occasional multi-billion pound bone?

This of course is where free market dogma comes unstuck. Sometimes the private sector can only be made to work if given large dollops of public money.

More misleading ministers

It is now clear that ministers have repeatedly misled MPs over the escalating costs of their biggest ever private finance initiative (PFI) project.

Under the defence training review (DTR) ministers plan to give the Metrix consortium a 30-year contract to build and run a specialist military academy in Wales. But increased borrowing costs and falls in the value of surplus MoD land have pushed the project’s price tag to £12bn. Many doubt the scheme's viability.

The National Audit Office recently disclosed that this “significant cost growth” led the Ministry of Defence to deem the project unaffordable last May. In spite of this, hapless Armed forces minister Bob Ainsworth has repeatedly claimed that it provides savings to the taxpayer.

Last April, a week after he was told of a £1bn increase in costs, Mr Ainsworth stated in a written parliamentary answer that the project provided savings of approximately £400 million over 30 years.

On 3 November, Ainsworth told MPs that “the programme is still affordable and remains more affordable than the in-house alternative”. But the MoD subsequently disclosed under the freedom of information act that the cost of the programme remained at £12bn. It has also emerged that the MoD has developed a new in-house “fallback” proposal, which it has deemed both “affordable and deliverable”.

Tory MP Mark Pritchard is a vocal opponent of the privatisation, which is interesting in itself. His constituency of the Wrekin includes RAF Cosford, which would close under the PFI. He says: “the project’s figures no longer add up - and neither do the minister’s words. There needs to be an early and updated statement in the House to clear up a long list of ministerial contradictions.”

In a letter to Pritchard, Ainsworth has asserted that his statement that the project was affordable was correct “at the time… following negotiations with Metrix to drive down costs and a rigorous and detailed assessment of the project’s affordability issues”.

Ainsworth declined to stand by his claim that the PFI option was “more affordable than the in-house alternative”. Ironically, he stated that detailed information on the costs of the in-house option “underpins our negotiating position with Metrix, and its disclosure would hinder the MoD’s ability to achieve value-for-money”.

Pritchard has accused Ainsworth of compromising his own department's negotiating position and prejudicing its ongoing evaluation. He claims that the government’s current financial difficulties mean the Treasury cannot ignore the rising costs of the project. "It is no longer tenable for ministers to write off the fallback in-house option." he says.

An MoD spokesperson told me: “The bottom line is that [the project] is affordable. The MOD and Metrix have over the last few months and continue to work constructively together to drive down costs without materially affecting the scope of the project. You can’t solely focus on the cost, affordability also incorporates the fact that [the project] is now the best value for money for the taxpayer.” But she refused to deny that the MoD has increased its funding for the project to ease its affordability issues.

Under the PFI, staff from Cosford and other MoD bases would have the option of transferring to St Athan in the Vale of Glamorgan as employees of the Metrix consortium, which includes arms companies Qinetic and Raytheon, as well as training bodies City and Guilds and the Open University.

The Public and Commercial Services (PCS) Union opposes the PFI. Regional spokesperson Robert O'Harney, says: “Should the PFI go ahead, it will see our members being privatised and then 4 years later being given the choice of moving themselves and families to Wales or being made redundant. Additionally the vast ex-military experience of many of our members will be lost forever.”

No retreat

FROM PRIVATE EYE Latest! 14-27 Nov 2008 1223
The Ministry of Defence is increasingly desperate to save its faltering plan to privatise military training at a new defence academy at St Athan, SouthWales, despite having acknowledged that the £12bn PFI deal is unaffordable and poses rishs to the frontline (see Eye 1213)

With the credit crunch also having put costs up by £1bn, something has to give. So when defence minister Bob Ainsworth announced that the MOD was ploughing ahead, he pointed out that "considerable progress had been made in driving down costs". This will involve cutting the length of training courses by 25% through "compression, rationalisation and harmonisation". Officially that means cutting waste but those involved in defence training say there is nothing like the scope for 25 percent cuts.

So defence training will have to suffer to spare the PFI deal, even though the off-balance sheet allure of PFI - which defence ministers admitted was the reason for a PFI in the first place - has vanished as all PFIs are going back on the books.Could it be because the deal is so crucial to the companies lining up for it? Qinetiq, the defence research company privatised by the MOD but on which it remains reliant, admits in its 2008 accounts: "There is a risk that the MoD may materially change the final scope or delay or cancel the implementation of the programme, which would have a significant effect on the expected future growth of the group".

Other firms have already got their snouts in the trough. The programme has cost £35 million so far, of which £12m has gone in consultancy. The biggest earner, predictably, is PwC which has received almost £1m a year for advising the MoD. With the plan already well delayed, the MoD's commercial director, Amyas Morse, who joined from PwC in 2006, will be signing in its cheques for a while yet.

Rhodri doesn't understand the reality of the DTA!!!

A MoD bulletin has recently been issued to advise PCS members on the latest information regarding the deferred decision on the Defence Training Review (DTR). The bulletin focuses on an recently published DTR newsletter that was circulated to all staff:
Rhodri Morgan should get his facts right and so should the other AMs blindly following his lead and supporting this crazy doomed project!

Ministry of Defence

20^th October 2008 MoD/BB/112/08

To: MoD Branch Secretaries

Cc: Group Executive Committee

Instructional Officer Committee

DTR. Non Announcement on package 1. Further Delays- further Frustration

Introduction

After the recent delays in announcing anything of substance, members in scope of package 1 of DTR were expecting some clarification on their futures. Any such hopes were dashed by Ainsworth’s statement to the House of Commons.

Meetings with senior officers had previously revealed that package 1 “was just about affordable”. Given this was before the credit crunch, before the fall in house prices and before the fall in land prices, PCS had been hopeful that the MoD would gracefully abandon this foolish enterprise.

Ainsworth Announces

During the defence debate the Minister made the following comments:

“As in all areas of defence, we continue to examine how we can improve training. The House is aware of the defence training review programme. The review will transform how we deliver specialist phase 2 and phase 3 technical training on a defence-wide basis, and, once complete, will help us to adjust to changes in demand, to make more efficient and effective use of training personnel, to improve accommodation and to make better and more efficient use of the training estate… Hon. Members will be aware that progress on defence training review package 1 has been more difficult and prolonged than expected. However, I can report that considerable progress has been made in driving down costs and towards achieving an affordable, value-for-money package 1, which is on track for an investment decision next spring, with the contract signature to come approximately 15 months later.”

IPT Team leader meeting with Trade Unions

Geoff Nield met with the trade unions shortly before Ainsworth’s comments in the House. A part of the information imparted was that the fall back position is MORE expensive than proceeding to contract. This is a staggering confession and beggars the question that if the fall back position is more expensive, then how can it be a fall back position at all? This appears to be more smoke and mirrors from Nield’s team and it is something that PCS will be taking up at the next meeting with the IPT.

IPT issues propaganda rag

Some of you may already have seen the latest DTR Package 1 Update. The eight page “newsletter” includes some useful information sandwiched between thinly disguised propaganda.

The newsletter includes a revised timeline for DTR package 1:

• Main Gate Approval- Spring 2009
• Financial close- Summer 2010.
• Vesting day- Autumn 2010
• Start of construction- Autumn 2010
• New service commence- 2014-2015.

This in itself appears to be wishful thinking and PCS expects further slippage to the right as time goes on, as is fairly common with projects in the MoD.

Rhodri Morgan tells PCS members not to worry- they'll love moving

The newsletter, incredibly contains a message from Rhodri Morgan, the First Minister for Wales! The piece is nothing more than a thinly disguised attempt to prepare PCS members for the “inevitable” transfer to St Athan. Rhodri tells readers of presumable success stories in bringing work to the Vale of Glamorgan. He has the nerve to include DARA in this.

DARA's “Red Dragon” hanger is available for redevelopment within the footprint of DTR, not because of success but because the End to End review moved much of DARA’s work to RAF forward bases.

The First Minister waxes lyrical about the transport and communication links to St Athan, but forgets to mention the local MP's (John Smith) call for a new railway station and roads to service the Defence Technical Academy. If links are so good then what is Smith talking about?

Rhodri Morgan also talks glowingly of the relocation of Civil Service jobs to South Wales- in particular he mentions Home Office, Department for Transport, Patent Office, Statistics Office, DVLA etc and how “brilliantly” this has worked for thousands of Civil Servants. What's more he assures readers that there are packages to help Civil Servants make the move...the only problem is that staff in scope of DTR package 1 will NOT BE CIVIL SERVANTS. Obviously it’s too much to expect the First Minister and his entourage to understand the reality of the DTA and PCS members’ opposition to it.

It seems to PCS that “Team Wales” has a lot to learn.

Compression, rationalisation and harmonisation = Job losses

The newsletter contains an article by Steve Krosnar-Clarke that talks about CRH- being Compression, Rationalisation and Harmonisation. These methodologies will reduce the length of courses by 25%.

What Krosnar-Clarke does not say is what that means going forward. If you keep the same number of courses but compression them, then the total number of hours training is reduced and the number of trainers required must, by the same token, be reduced. Therefore CRH is the prelude for redundancies- potentially in the region of 25%.

Given that these plans are already being made PCS will be liaising with experts within the union to ascertain whether or not such a programme is in contravention of the recently signed Cabinet Office Protocol on privatisation and TUPE transfer.

Risky business

The newsletter also contains an article by Chris Brand on risk. It might be a Freudian slip but calling DTR a risky business has been exactly the PCS position for a substantial period of time.

Worryingly, the article's longest paragraph is one about the risks of crossing a road. The article advises that there are risk mitigation plans that are regularly updated. In fact the biggest risk and the one that forced a reappraisal of methodology in package 2- i.e. teaching staff refusing to relocate has the flimsiest of plans attached to it. It seems to consist of begging Instructional Officers not to leave and in the meantime training would be Instructors in colleges around the Vale of Glamorgan.

PCS will be contacting Chris Brand for a full copy of the latest mitigation plans and will circulate them to branches if possible.

Still everything to play for

The DTR IPT is seeking to become a master of spin. This should surprise no one. But it is crucial that PCS members don't believe the hype and therefore consider defence training privatisation a fait accompli. To do so now will be a grave tactical error and one that the IPT would welcome.

Recent articles on Defence Management website state that Hutton is being told to adopt a “more realistic budget” in the wake of the £2 billion deficit and now the hundreds of billion pounds bail out of the banking system. The question of the fall back position being more expensive than the privatisation starts to look like a rather sorry attempt to save the privatisation at a time of major financial pressure on MOD budgets by positioning itself as “value for money” against keeping training in house. Again the contrast to emerging package 2 solutions is notable.

What can you do to support the PCS campaign?

• There are various activities that branch secretaries can initiate to keep people involved and active. Members can:
• Write to Rhodri Morgan and tell him that you don’t want to be relocated or privatised.
• Write to Bob Ainsworth and call upon him to meet with your union officials as he had previously promised.
• Ensure you have a delegate to IO conference and prime him or her to ask difficult questions of Major General Tim Inshaw when he comes to address conference.
• Support PCS in its national action to seek fair pay for hard pressed Civil Servants.
• Write to the National Audit Office and call for an investigation into the financing of the DTR programme.
• Pass any interesting stories (that do not breach confidentiality) to the PCS Defence Sector Instructional Officer Committee.

PCS will continue to campaign with you and for you.

GOVERNMENT PROPAGANDA HERE

MOD reviewing extensive cuts to St athan military academy

From Defence Management today article which is not MoD biased.

Leaders of DTR defend the programme
Wednesday, October 15, 2008

The leaders of the integrated project team (IPT) for the troubled Defence Training Review (DTR) have been forced to instil a vote of confidence in the oft-delayed, over budget and controversial project.

A day after armed forces minister Bob Ainsworth indicated that a final decision on package 1 of the training programme would not be announced until next year due to financial troubles, IPT leader Brigadier Geoff Nield defended the project.

Nield said in a lengthy statement that the MoD was committed "to continuing with the current assessment phase".

He acknowledged that there have been affordability challenges and that this has forced Metrix, the leader of package 1, to re-examine its proposal. Numerous MPs have told Defence Management that the DTR's funding is heavily reliant on the sales of vacant MoD properties. The current financial crisis has not allowed the MoD to do this which has delayed a final financial agreement.

The project is believed to already be £1bn over budget and Metrix and the MoD are reviewing extensive cuts to the programme. Ainsworth told parliament that even the alternatives such as moving the DTR to a central location in the West Midlands would be just as expensive if not more costl y.

Although Nield believes that Metrix has come up with a business plan to make package 1 affordable, the MoD's Investment Approval Board will not review the proposal until the spring 2009. A financial close could be delayed until mid-2010.

Ultimately the training programme which was to begin in 2012 at the St Athan site in Wales will now be delayed until 2014 at the earliest.

What is wales and what is it for tells it like it is
Behind the blank statements on St Athan

There was a very upbeat tale in the South Wales Echo yesterday, describing the military training privatisation at St Athan as “‘on track”.......

NOW THE RUBBISH/PROPAGANDA THAT THE PEOPLE OF WALES are getting...

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2008/10/15/12bn-st-athan-defence-academy-plans-on-track-91466-22033869/

£12bn St Athan defence academy plans ‘on track’

Oct 15 2008 by Peter Collins, South Wales Echo

PLANS for the £12bn defence academy at St Athan are “on track”, the Government has confirmed.

There had been fears that the huge project in the Vale of Glamorgan could fall victim to the worldwide economic crisis.

But Armed Forces Minister Bob Ainsworth has confirmed that “considerable progress” has been made on cutting the costs of the project.

The Defence Technical Academy, which was originally called the Defence Training Academy at the former RAF base at St Athan, will be the single biggest investment in Wales.

Since the Metrix consortium won the contract in January last year, there have been mounting concerns that it could be at risk because of savings required by the Ministry of Defence.

This led to the smaller of the two development packages for the base being dropped because costs were too high. The main package, however, was left untouched.

The worldwide economic downturn has increased fears about the development.

But in a statement to the House of Commons, Armed Forces Minister Bob Ainsworth sought to calm nerves.

He said: “As in all areas of defence, we continue to look at how we can improve training.

“Members will be aware that progress on package one has been more difficult and prolonged than expected.

“However, I can report that considerable progress has been made in driving down costs and towards achieving affordable, value for money.

“Package one is on track for an investment decision in the spring of next year, with contract signature expected approximately 15 months later.”

The statement has been welcomed by Vale of Glamorgan MP, John Smith, who said: “This is great news for the Welsh economy and the Vale of Glamorgan in particular.

“This statement puts paid to the neg- ative rumours that have been bandied about by doom-and-gloom merchants.

“The minister’s statement confirms what I have always maintained, that St Athan is the only location that will provide technical training for all our armed forces in a high-quality bespoke environment and purpose-built facilities. We have the skilled workforce, the facilities and the project team to make this a great success.”

A Metrix spokesman said: “We are pleased with the progress that has been made so far and look forward to working closely with the MoD to deliver the Package One programme and the Defence Technical Academy in St Athan.”

peter.collins@mediawales.co.uk

Pritchard has called the privatisation of military training " a privatisation gone too far."

latest article from http://www.defencemanagement.com/news_story.asp?id=7335

No DTR announcement, delays inevitable
13 October 2008

The MoD has been accused of further delaying an announcement on the Defence Training Review (DTR) after armed forces minister Bob Ainsworth avoided confirmation of the move of package 1 to St Athan, Wales.

Last month Defence Management saw a leaked MoD memo confirming that despite resistance by staff to the move to rural Wales, cost overruns and fears over privatising defence training, the MoD was pushing ahead with the first part of the training- known as package 1. Ainsworth was scheduled to make an announcement last week, but avoided doing so when he came under intense questioning from one of the chief opponents of the move.

MP Mark Prithchard questioned the rising costs of the programme which have ballooned by £1bn in less than a year to £12bn. Ainsworth defended the programme, but admitted that even the cost of the alternatives was now escalating.

"We still have an affordable package that is far cheaper than the alternatives, and that has been worked on over the summer. We will be able to go ahead with defence package 1 and get value for money out of those proposals," Ainsworth said.

Later though he admitted that no financial agreement would be in place until next spring, a delay of a year since the package 1 was awarded to Metrix and by six months from the most recent target date for an announcement on the progression of package 1.
The PCS Union has been a staunch opponent of the DTR’s move to Wales and the privatisation of military training. Officials pointed out that the MoD had now admitted that the cost of package 1 and its alternatives were growing out of control. An unofficial PCS blog made it clear the union would continue to resist the DTR.

"This is another first for the DTR programme in suggesting that the "fallback posistion" is more expensive than the proposed move to St Athan !! No wonder the Department needs to give Metrix another six months grace to rearrange costings to fit. PCS will continue to campaign against this looming financial disaster," PCS Shropshire said.
PCS Branch Manager H O’Harney said that the non-announcement was not a surprise, considering that RAF Cosford staff had already waited six months: "A £12 billion PFI carrying on in this current financial crisis seems ridiculous given the risks and affordability issues. Our members at Cosford have made it clear that they have no intention to move Wales and the risk to the training of the Armed Forces is still real. It would appear that the MoD want to privatise at all cost despite the huge risks."

The crumbling economy and the downturn in the property market have taken their toll on the DTR. The Metrix consortium originally planned to fund the new training centre in Wales through the sales of excess MoD estates that would be freed up when staff moved to St Athan. But the downturn in the property market threw off the entire business plan and financial support for the programme, forcing Metrix officials to examine another way to fund the programme.

To add to the programme’s woes, civilian trainers from RAF Cosford, the base which lost out to St Athans for the training contract, have been resistant to moving from the suburban West Midlands to rural Wales. There have also been concerns over the preservation of the military ethos since the training will be privatised instead of being run by MoD staff and military personnel.

Pritchard has called the privatisation of military training " a privatisation gone too far."

PFI dying

Ministers insist £12 billion defence training PFI not dead
Public Private Finance - London,UK
The cost of the Defence Training Review has risen from £11 billion to £12 billion, and the deal has been hit by rising construction inflation and problems ...

wishful thinking!

EDS one of the metrix consortium messes up big time AGAIN!!!

Our interview with MoD over EDS missing hard drive ComputerWeekly.com - UK A Ministry of Defence official says it is investigating with its contractor EDS whether a 1TB portable hard drive, which went missing from EDS's secure ...

School for mercenaries on hold

From the latest MOD propaganda! Which includes these words of wisdom!

MESSAGE FROM RIGHT HONOURABLE RHODRI MORGAN AM, FIRST MINISTER OF THE WELSH ASSEMBLY GOVERNMENT

I am pleased to contribute to this newsletter on the Defence Training Review Project. Everyone in Wales is looking forward to the DefenceTechnical Academy (DTA).

Likewise I am looking forward to working with Vice Admiral Peter Wilkinson and Major General Tim Inshaw on its delivery. I met both of them recently to underline the Welsh Assembly Government’s commitment to assisting the MOD realise its plans for the new tri-service Defence Training and school for mercenaries campus at St Athan in the Vale of Glamorgan

New Service Commencement Date 2014 - 2015

we can't afford it!
A NOTE FROM BRIGADIER GEOFF NIELD, DTR PACKAGE 1 IPT LEADER
As many of you are already aware a phase of work has been underway to address affordability challenges within Project 1 and update various aspects of the Metrix proposals. This process has unfortunately been more difficult and prolonged than we expected, with certain aspects of Metrix’s proposals requiring more detailed work. This additional unplanned work prevented the Project from proceeding to the main investment decision within the desired timeframe. A contributory factor has been the impact of the current financial situation which has added some complexity to the negotiations between MOD and Metrix.

Over the last six months we have been working constructively with Metrix to overcome these difficulties to try and achieve an affordable, value for money, acceptable and deliverable project.
This has involved both parties working hard to drive down costs without materially affecting the scope of the Project and get the best deal possible for the taxpayer. I am pleased to tell you that the
hard work has paid off and considerable progress has been made. Following a detailed review of the Project and negotiations with Metrix, it is now judged that the Package 1 Project can be made affordable.
The outcome of this work is the Department’s commitment to continuing with the current
Assessment Phase. A Final Clarification and Confirm (‘FC&C’) exercise is now underway, after which Metrix’s revised proposals will be evaluated. Subject to a successful evaluation outcome, and confirmation of affordability, the Project will then proceed to the formal approval point of the MOD’s Investment Approvals Board.

This is anticipated to take place in the spring of next year after which an
announcement will be made. It is anticipated that Financial Close will follow approximately 15 months later.
I appreciate that these last few months may have been an unsettling time for many affected by the Project. Although a Project of this size and complexity is always subject to change, I now believe that the work of the last year has led to some stability in the Project going forward. This newsletter now seeks to clarify the situation and outline anticipated dates to assist with personal planning. I will of course seek to update you as the Project develops.
Finally, I would like to warmly thank the Right Honourable Rhodri Morgan (First Minister of the Welsh Assembly Government) and others for their contribution to this newsletter. We aim to have more of these wide-ranging articles in future editions.