Misleading DTR coverage

Last week the BBC published an article about the Defence Training Review (DTR). It was entitled '£12bn military academy 'on track'. The article was quite biased and lacking in research. Chris Ames sums it up very well here. Chris Ames (also runs the Iraq dossier website.)

Back to the article which doesn’t mention that the project is already delayed and over budget nor the fact that Qinetiq, the equal equity partner along with Sodexho, are themselves experiencing difficulties. See the following articles:
The Cost of Privatisation
Qinetiq Prepares to Tighten Finances

I won’t go into whether or not the 5000 jobs figure is accurate, but that number of ‘new’ jobs won’t be created at the base. The jobs are already held by Civil Servants around the country who will be expected to relocate to Wales or lose their jobs.

Many of the trainers will be unable to relocate to Wales and the loss of these skilled trainers will put Defence Training and front line troops at risk.

In addition to the above there is the question of putting the Defence of the United Kingdom in the hands of private companies that are ultimately out to make a profit for their shareholders. A further risk is that the companies involved may get taken over by a non-British organisation which could generate a conflict of interest between corporate aims and loyalties and national security.

You may also be interested in this article entitled ‘The Ministry and the Media'

supporter of Academy

I remain supportive of the principle of the Academy, especially as the
economic stimulus it would provide is much needed now.
However, as it is not a constituency issue, I am not
aware of the current details.

With regard to public sector investment, I am a keen supporter of public/private sector
partnerships.  There is no debate scheduled but, if any significant events occur in
relation to it, there would bound to be a Ministerial statment.

Jenny Randerson

John Smith MP drummer boy for METRIX

Parliamentary clash

Mark Pritchard continues to badger the government on the rising cost of DTR. He submitted a written question:

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what recent discussions he has had with the Secr etary of State for Defence on the implications for Wales of the defence training review programme

The reply from the government was:

The St. Athan Defence Training Academy is a very important project for Wales. The substantial investment of Package 1 will create thousands of direct and indirect jobs both during construction and from 2013, when construction is completed.

On the 28^th January the following oral exchange was recorded in Hansard:

Mark Pritchard (Wrekin)

John Smith has claimed many times that hundreds of jobs will come to Wales as a result of the defence training review programme, but the programme has rising costs and increasing delays. Indeed, in his desperation, the hon. Gentleman visited the Prime Minister this week, even though the latter has given no assurance that the defence training review will go ahead in Wales. Do we not need an early statement from th e Secretary of State giving us the truth about the project and its rising costs?

Paul Murphy (Secretary of State, Wales Office)

I have had no indication at all that there will be any change of plan as far as that huge investment in Wales is concerned. The Government are committed to it but I am sure that, when the time com es, there will be a proper statement to this House of Commons.

John Smith (Vale of Glamorgan)

Does my right hon. Friend agree that employment levels in south Wales will be greatly improved by the 5,000 jobs brought to the area by the defence technical academy? Does he also agree that it is about time that Opposition Members stopped knocking the project and began pulling together to ensure that it is brought in on time and within budg et?

Paul Murphy (Secretary of State, Wales Office)

That is what we all like to hear. My hon. Friend has been a great champion of the project. When those jobs come to Wales, it will be as a result of the biggest single Government investment in Wales ever.

Clearly John Smith is still playing his role of drummer boy for METRIX, but his figures are as credible as his knowledge of defence training. John Smith recently talked about the need to get away from “chalk and talk” training- it shows how little he knows about the modern training environment. PCS believes not only do his 5,000 jobs include over a 1,000 military posts- which to the public are hardly countable, but also many of the jobs Smith continually mentions are transitory jobs created during the build phase.

“Government ministers need to come clean and declare this project dead”

HOC 11 December 2008 : Parliamentary Debate
Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con): On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The defence training review is the largest private finance initiative in British history, worth £11 billion-indeed, the costs have increased in the last six months to £12 billion. I seek your advice, Mr. Deputy Speaker, because in today’s Financial Times it was announced that Land Securities Trillium, one of the major backers of the defence training review package, has pulled out of the project altogether. This has major implications for the future training of our armed forces not only in the short term, but in the medium to long term.
Is it not a disgrace that, yet again, the Government hav e chosen to leak this information to the Financial Times rather than bring it to the Floor of the House?

Mr. Deputy Speaker: I can only repeat that Mr. Speaker considers it extremely important that all important matters on which this House should have a view should be brought before the House, but I am sure the hon. Gentleman will find ways to pursue these matters himself, and the points he has made are on the record.

Shropshire Star Article
Great quote from Mark Pritchard MP
“Government ministers need to come clean and declare this project dead”

News reaches manchester too!  Eco home plan bust too!

Just 1700 homes for Deepcut site ?
Get Surrey - Manchester,England,UK
Deepcut was one of the casualties of the MoD’s Defence Training Review, which aims to
close and relocate several Armed Forces bases in the South East.
……Mark Pritchard has demanded a statement from the Ministry of Defence regarding the decision by Land Securities Trillium to withdraw from the Metrix consortium, the lead bidder for the Defence Training Review (DTR). A spokesman on behalf of Trillium stated that the company had invested a considerable amount of money on the project, but due to the significantly increased bid costs which were carried at risk by the bidders they would
now have to withdraw.

New Labour attack Jill Evans

A Welsh unknown New Labour European candidate has attacked Plaid MEP Jill Evans over her opposition to the proposed Defence Training Academy at St Athan.saying Welsh workers should be incensed by her continuing refusal to support these cleaning jobs especially at a time when the global economic crisis means people are facing redundancy.

These minimum wage jobs are vital to the economy of Wales. At a time of serious economic challenges caused by news deregualtion of the markets and the encouragement of unlimited greed ..Plaid is on the side of ordinary working people.

Miss Wagstaff noted

If I were an eager observer of Welsh politics and concerned Labour supporter who cared about my party, what sort of questions would I be asking at this time?

1. Did Labour receive any motion requests for the Llandudno conference in March that called for the Euro selection process to be halted because of concerns over a stitch-up?
2. Was an official European office used for canvassing by candidates, against strict ethics rules? i.e. if a member of her staff called constituency secretaries to check they'd received correspondence and then asked if they would consider supporting them in the selection process it would contravene rules and standards in the European Parliament and the Labour Party.
3. Why were calls for party hustings during the selection process repeatedly refused by Transport House?
4. Does Eluned have any ambitions of being an Assembly Member, now or in the future?

Adam Price for a military academy?

Adam Price MP has a regular column in the weekly news magazine Golwg. That of 13 November was titled Y ddadl o blaid academi filwrol – ‘The debate in favour of a military academy’.

Much of it discusses the history of militarism in Wales, a comparison with the Scots, and the number of Welsh people in the armed forces historically and today. The part about St Athan actually only comes in the final few sentences as follows, with a translation of it below

Yn yr un modd, tra bod protestio yn erbyn polisiau a rhyfeloedd a dulliau ac arfau milwrol yn ddilys, ydi gwrthwynebu academi hyfforddiant (Academi Filwrol Sain Tathan ym Mro Morgannwg) fel y cyfryw yn gwneud synnwyr? Onid natur yr hyfforddiant ddylai fod ffocws ein gwrthwynebiad ni?

Wedi’r cwbl pan ffurfiwyd West Point gan yr Americanwr o Gymro, Thomas Jefferson, academi heddwch oedd ei weledigaeth e. Oni allwn ni ganolbwyntio ar greu, mewn cysylltiad a’r datblygiad hwn, pwyslais newydd a chanolfan rhyngwladol o ragoriaeth mewn ymdrechion i gadw heddwch.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

In the same way, while it is correct to protest against military policies and means, against wars and arms, does it make sense to oppose a training academy as such (St Athan Military Training Academy in the Vale of Glamorgan)? Should it not be the nature of the training being provided that forms the focus for our opposition?

After all, when West Point was established by that Welsh American, Thomas Jefferson, his vision was of a peace academy. Can’t we concentrate, in relation to this development, on creating a new emphasis on an international centre of excellence in peace keeping activities.

Costs soaring into stratosphere

3 Nov 2008 : Column 15

Defence Training Review Programme

10. Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con): How much his Department has spent on the defence training review programme to date; and if he will make a statement. [232056]

The Minister for the Armed Forces (Mr. Bob Ainsworth): Expenditure to date on the defence training review programme is £34.6 million. That includes the expenditure costs of both package 1 and package 2 of the training review programme.

Mark Pritchard: The Minister will know that the defence training review is the largest private finance initiative in British history. It was originally estimated that the cost would be £11 billion, but in the last six months it has risen to £12 billion. Will the Minister confirm whether this programme will go ahead and whether Treasury Ministers have been consulted about the escalating costs?

Mr. Ainsworth: The hon. Gentleman is right that the financial situation has led to cost growth in the programme, but we have worked with Metrix to see how to minimise the costs. I know that this will disappoint the hon. Gentleman greatly because of his constituency interest, but I have to say that the programme is still affordable and remains more affordable than the in-house alternative, so our plans are to go ahead with the programme on the basis of package 1.

David Taylor (North-West Leicestershire) (Lab/Co-op): May I return to the Metrix training contract, in the light of the unsatisfactory answer given by the Under-Secretary of State for Defence, my hon. Friend the Member for Grantham and Stamford (Mr. Davies)—our new hon. Friend—and, indeed, the answer given to the hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard)? The contract costs are more than £1 million a day and are soaring into the stratosphere. Will the Minister say whether or not the following quote was well sourced? The defence training review executive board investigated “major affordability issues” that could not be disclosed to the project board as they were “too sensitive”. What is going wrong with the contract?

The Minister for the Armed Forces (Mr. Bob Ainsworth): The costs to which my hon. Friend refers cover the provision of the defence training package over a 30-year programme, so he should not be surprised if some of the figures are high. I am sorry that he found what I said to the hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard) unsatisfactory, but we have re-examined affordability and remain convinced that the package is the best option going forward and that it is better than the in-house alternative in providing the quality of training that we need at a reasonable price—a good price for the taxpayer.

David Taylor (North-West Leicestershire) (Lab/Co-op): Will my hon. Friend the Minister comment on the training implications of the future strike capability of the RAF? In particular, does he think that the Metrix consortium’s contracts to train military personnel over the next 30 years, which have increased in cost by £1 billion, are adequate for the purpose? There seems to be a cabal of private companies locking the taxpayer and the military into a private finance initiative scheme that is costing much more money over the years for a far inferior service to the RAF and other forces.

Mr. Davies: I can assure my hon. Friend that the RAF is clear that the arrangements that we are making for training are indeed adequate for the purpose, to use his phrase.