View From The Top Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 So another £800m is going out of the UK economy, more skills lost. This ranks up there with the Bombardier trains debacle. I really do wish that our government would grow a pair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 Absolutely bizarre........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 Before anybody gets on their high horse about us not supporting the British shipbuilding industry and protecting jobs, it is worth taking one very important factor into account: Not a single British firm actually submitted a final bid for this contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toomer Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 Before anybody gets on their high horse about us not supporting the British shipbuilding industry and protecting jobs, it is worth taking one very important factor into account: Not a single British firm actually submitted a final bid for this contract. That might have something to do with the lack of ship building skills left in this country due to the economic cituation and also government cuts over the last twenty years or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Charming Man Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 Before anybody gets on their high horse about us not supporting the British shipbuilding industry and protecting jobs, it is worth taking one very important factor into account: Not a single British firm actually submitted a final bid for this contract. Didn't they claim they don't have the capacity any more to deal with a contract of this size, due to cuts they've undertaken in the past? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 That might have something to do with the lack of ship building skills left in this country due to the economic cituation and also government cuts over the last twenty years or so. So we still have the skills to build some massive and hugely complex aircraft carriers, but not for relatively simple fuel tankers? I don't accept that. Clearly we do have the skills and the infrastructure to complete the project, but it is obviously a question of economics. There could be an argument that the govt could have offered incentives for firms to put together some kind of consortium in order to encourage it if they really wanted the UK industry to take it on I suppose, but I guess they weren't left with much choice in this instance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 Before anybody gets on their high horse about us not supporting the British shipbuilding industry and protecting jobs, it is worth taking one very important factor into account: Not a single British firm actually submitted a final bid for this contract. The very few shipyards left claim the requirements were written in such a way that submitting a bid was a waste of time. Main issue was labour costs and practices required, I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopGun Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 So another £800m is going out of the UK economy, more skills lost. This ranks up there with the Bombardier trains debacle. I really do wish that our government would grow a pair. Bombardier offered a less suitable and more expensive Crossrail trains solution than Siemens. That's pretty much all that counts. Bombardier has just gained a new smaller order from the Department of Transport but the message was clear. Up your game or don't whine when you don't get selected under the rules of a fair tender process. That seems absolutely fair to me. BL/Austin-Rover/MG-Rover went out of business and rightly so because they made crap cars and the Germans made good ones for the same price. Same issues at play here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 So another £800m is going out of the UK economy, more skills lost. This ranks up there with the Bombardier trains debacle. I really do wish that our government would grow a pair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 The design of the tankers was undertaken by BMT, a british company. That is where the future lies...... designing things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint-scooby Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 If we dont have the capacity any more, open more Costa coffee shops, simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 The design of the tankers was undertaken by BMT, a british company. That is where the future lies...... designing things It is part of the future, not all of it. We need to manufacture as well. Design will feed the few people with exemplary design skills and whoever hangs off their coat-tails. Manufacturing has the potential to feed a lot more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 pretty **** poor really....this decision that is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecuk268 Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 Free market economics and healthy competition. Why should the taxpayer subsidize inefficiency. I'm beginning to sound a bit too right wing, so I'll shut up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 pretty **** poor really....this decision that is As a navy man yourself delldays, what are your objections to it? Seems to me that the requirement has been identified and the contract has been given to the best bidder (as it should be) to go ahead. It is a shame that no British companies felt able to bid but, seeing as they didn't, would you rather we gave the contracts to a foreign corporation or just not bother with them at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 As a navy man yourself delldays, what are your objections to it? Seems to me that the requirement has been identified and the contract has been given to the best bidder (as it should be) to go ahead. It is a shame that no British companies felt able to bid but, seeing as they didn't, would you rather we gave the contracts to a foreign corporation or just not bother with them at all? rule britannia and all that......I would rather the things were built here where they can be monitored and altered as they progress...not deliver the things with problems that we will have to sort anyway huge jobs like this should be used to save local economies.........IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 What next? People having a pop at Thatcher for refusing to pour tax payer's money down the drain to prop up the failing mining industry? Sigh.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 I love the way some people want a closed economy, so we can spend more money on an inferior product. What we need is Bombardier and ship builders etc to start getting oversees contracts by becoming more efficient and increasing their technological know-how. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 rule britannia and all that......I would rather the things were built here where they can be monitored and altered as they progress...not deliver the things with problems that we will have to sort anyway huge jobs like this should be used to save local economies.........IMO Do you remember the Austin Maestro? Heap of sh!t. Now, imagine you were underwater in the equivalent of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintbletch Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 trousers, is that a "I can't believe the government would give UK tax payers' money to a foreign country when we could have supported UK manufacturing instead" face-palm or a "I can't believe that the OP can't see that it's all about the free market and that government intervention, subsidy or favouritism is always a bad thing" face-palm or some other sort of face palm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 Do you remember the Austin Maestro? Heap of sh!t. Now, imagine you were underwater in the equivalent of that. what the fuk has the austin maestro got to do with this...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 what the fuk has the austin maestro got to do with this...? The fact that that is the kind of thing we build here. When was the last time we manufactured something good? Concorde? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 The fact that that is the kind of thing we build here. When was the last time we manufactured something good? Concorde? t45 destroyer...the best surface front line ship in the world......built here.. which is a tad more relevant than a fuking little car Knight Class RFA Bay Class RFA all new, all brilliant ships and all built here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 t45 destroyer...the best surface front line ship in the world......built here.. which is a tad more relevant than a fuking little car Knight Class RFA Bay Class RFA all new, all brilliant ships and all built here So you are of the belief that the Government decided that these shipbuilders weren't good enough so they put up barriers to entry for a tender? Or that they did it just to spite the population? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 So you are of the belief that the Government decided that these shipbuilders weren't good enough so they put up barriers to entry for a tender? Or that they did it just to spite the population? it probably boiled down to who was the cheapest.....but is that necessarily the best when they will or could have more people out of work because of this...who knows but saying (like you are) we don't have the expertise to build such things just shows you up for being as clueless as you sound Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 it probably boiled down to who was the cheapest.....but is that necessarily the best when they will or could have more people out of work because of this...who knows but saying (like you are) we don't have the expertise to build such things just shows you up for being as clueless as you sound Meh, the issue as I can see it, as with the NHS and every other bl00dy thing in this country, is that we are inefficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 The fact that that is the kind of thing we build here. When was the last time we manufactured something good? Concorde? Rolls Royce engines mostly have a good rep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 Meh, the issue as I can see it, as with the NHS and every other bl00dy thing in this country, is that we are inefficient. inefficient at what...? please don't embarrass yourself and say shipbuilding....? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevvy Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 UK did Bid for them, but our costs were way to high, cheap labour in Korea, we would never compete on a like for like basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wade Garrett Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 Bombardier offered a less suitable and more expensive Crossrail trains solution than Siemens. That's pretty much all that counts. Bombardier has just gained a new smaller order from the Department of Transport but the message was clear. Up your game or don't whine when you don't get selected under the rules of a fair tender process. That seems absolutely fair to me. BL/Austin-Rover/MG-Rover went out of business and rightly so because they made crap cars and the Germans made good ones for the same price. Same issues at play here. It is not 'all that counts'. Factor in the welfare costs for the redundant Bombardier employees and their families. Factor in the companies that rely on Bombardier contacts for their survival, then factor in the welfare costs for their families. If they got the uk contract it could have allowed them to expand, win more overseas contracts and further improve the uk economy. Giving the contract to Siemens was a bad move by the government, also by the previous government that put the tender conditions in place. Would the French or Germans have given this contract overseas? Not a chance in hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 inefficient at what...? please don't embarrass yourself and say shipbuilding....? Well, seemingly so if it costs us more to manufacture the same ship... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 Well, seemingly so if it costs us more to manufacture the same ship... that is a cost issue the isn't it...and thanks to rip off britain...nothing to do with not having the expertise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 Rolls Royce engines mostly have a good rep. Fair point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 It is not 'all that counts'. Factor in the welfare costs for the redundant Bombardier employees and their families. Factor in the companies that rely on Bombardier contacts for their survival, then factor in the welfare costs for their families. If they got the uk contract it could have allowed them to expand, win more overseas contracts and further improve the uk economy. Giving the contract to Siemens was a bad move by the government, also by the previous government that put the tender conditions in place. Would the French or Germans have given this contract overseas? Not a chance in hell. Absolutely spot-on. Some people don't realise the true cost of a cheaper quote. We've had this problem for decades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 that is a cost issue the isn't it...and thanks to rip off britain...nothing to do with not having the expertise. Either way, we cannot buy the materials and obtain the labour for the same price as South Korea... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 Either way, we cannot buy the materials and obtain the labour for the same price as South Korea... blame rip off britain for that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 blame rip off britain for that I will, perhaps you can point me to who I should write to and who is responsible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 I will, perhaps you can point me to who I should write to and who is responsible. you are the one showing yourself up mate...comparing ship building to a car from yesteryear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 Rolls Royce engines mostly have a good rep. Except of course the Trent 900s that they made for the earliest A380s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 Before anybody gets on their high horse about us not supporting the British shipbuilding industry and protecting jobs, it is worth taking one very important factor into account: Not a single British firm actually submitted a final bid for this contract. It was well established that the MoD were only looking at building abroad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 It was well established that the MoD were only looking at building abroad. Perhaps they're looking to offset that with some other "Made in Britain" contracts from the Koreans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelman Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 I am presuming that these contracts are awarded having been put out to tender. it would be interesting to see how accurate the "quotes" are and how much over spend there is. But it is crazy. Our ship building industry is almost dead, and doing this is another nail in the coffin as well as screwing our Balance of Payments. I wrote to my MP (Desmond Swayne) about Bombardier, and he wrote back some piffle. He's a cock, and seems little point writing to him over this as no doubt will get the same piffle. He failed to mention the wider affects that this sort of things have, service industries, high streets, etc etc, when the money that could have been earned isn't and therefore isn't spent in the shops. They are all cocks, and I reckon that there must be a lot of vested interests somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 you are the one showing yourself up mate...comparing ship building to a car from yesteryear I was trying to work out why this contract being given to the Koreans is the Governments fault in a free market. My point is, on the whole, the reason we are no longer massive exporters of manufactured produce is that on the whole, we are pretty w@nk at it. The point I was making was generalised. For instance, we're also very good with F1 cars. I didn't realise that we were excellent at building ships, but then I couldn't give 2 sh!ts about them. Which again raises the question, why were we not picked to build these ships? I don't give a f*** about rip off Britain, we don't obtain the materials or labour cheaply enough to compete, end of, so what do you expect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 Either way, we cannot buy the materials and obtain the labour for the same price as South Korea... That's not quite the same as being "inefficient". These RFAs more closely resemble commercial ships rather than complex warship. South Korea thus has a competitive advantage - but does a cheaper end price mean it's the right decision? No profit remains in the UK, no tax will be paid by British workers, no money will be spent in local British economies, and benefits will be paid out to people who could have been gainfully employed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopGun Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 It is not 'all that counts'. Factor in the welfare costs for the redundant Bombardier employees and their families. Factor in the companies that rely on Bombardier contacts for their survival, then factor in the welfare costs for their families. If they got the uk contract it could have allowed them to expand, win more overseas contracts and further improve the uk economy. Giving the contract to Siemens was a bad move by the government, also by the previous government that put the tender conditions in place. Would the French or Germans have given this contract overseas? Not a chance in hell. In terms of the tender issued to which Siemens and Bombardier responded, it is "totally what counts." The tender has criteria that are specific and certainly do not include potential welfare costs to the families of employees laid off by Bombardier. Nor should they. If Bombardier offers a class product at a competitive price, then the Ministry of Transport and other buyers abroad will buy it. As it stands, Siemens and Alstom sell the most new passenger train units because they have the best products at good value for money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 I was trying to work out why this contract being given to the Koreans is the Governments fault in a free market. My point is, on the whole, the reason we are no longer massive exporters of manufactured produce is that on the whole, we are pretty w@nk at it. The point I was making was generalised. For instance, we're also very good with F1 cars. I didn't realise that we were excellent at building ships, but then I couldn't give 2 sh!ts about them. Which again raises the question, why were we not picked to build these ships? I don't give a f*** about rip off Britain, we don't obtain the materials or labour cheaply enough to compete, end of, so what do you expect? Don't think that labour is particulary cheap in South Korea, not for skilled workers.Work ethic may be of a bit better quality though but there have been recent changes in the maximum work week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecuk268 Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 that is a cost issue the isn't it...and thanks to rip off britain...nothing to do with not having the expertise. It's also a political issue where the knock-on costs of unemployment, loss of skills etc aren't taken into account. I'm sure the French would have ensured that any new ships were built in France regardless but, of course, they support their industry even if it involves a degree of subsidy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 That's not quite the same as being "inefficient". These RFAs more closely resemble commercial ships rather than complex warship. South Korea thus has a competitive advantage - but does a cheaper end price mean it's the right decision? No profit remains in the UK, no tax will be paid by British workers, no money will be spent in local British economies, and benefits will be paid out to people who could have been gainfully employed. There is no chance that the knock on effects will not have been considered by the government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 There is no chance that the knock on effects will not have been considered by the government. you do realise this decision would not have been made at that level...dont you..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelman Posted 23 February, 2012 Share Posted 23 February, 2012 I don't give a f*** about rip off Britain, we don't obtain the materials or labour cheaply enough to compete, end of, so what do you expect? I know....can't understand how we can export Japanese cars to Japan. Britain has a bigger manufacturing sector (as % of GDP) than France but it does fall short of Germany. There is a general impression that we are crap at manufacturing, which we aren't, but we could be so much better. As for BoP, we are heavily in deficit with EU countries but in surplus (or near surplus depending on the year) with the rest of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.df4bace08d6214b24d8c04ce3795c4ef.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now