Member Info for stokey12

Hebridean9 ref 18.55 post the charge that Riverstone has is over virtually all of the assets of HARL. That said the new debt deal is the same as if you were remortgaing your house to get a lower interest rate. Your existing lender is not going to object provided that they get their money. As for the idea that they would call in a down payment on a sale can be discounted as they like any other lender can only get payments as provided for in the agreement. It is for this reason that I would expect the Riverstone loan to be paid off by March so as to avoid paying a fee for an extension.

This article from the BBC website does not seem to answer the question it poses. It does seem to indicate that we might not see any Interest cut before May and rules out a cut on Thursday. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68106731. This would seem to support a delay to the finance in order to get a lower interest rate. The current SONIA rate which the finance is likely to be tied to is 5.19%.

Just seen on LinkedIn

Matt SmithMatt Smith • 3rd+ • 3rd+ General Manager at Harland & WolffGeneral Manager at Harland & Wolff 1h •

1h •

I’m happy to share that I’m starting a new position as General Manager of Harland & Wolff (Methil) Ltd!

Ex BiFab employee

Lottie123 ref 08.31 post Due to the lack of people capable of doing the work it may not be possible to increase shift patterns. When the FSS tender was in process I noted that Team Resolute was saying that they woulld need a third of the people than Team UK. I think the difference in headcount was due to the use of techology. Once the knowledge transfer is completed HARL should be able to cut the time it takes to build the ships. I think JW said that it should be possible to build a ship in around a year.

Chrisatrdg ref 10.33 post on checking the Belfast Harbour website it looks like it is only delivering products as it is now showing as leaving at 16.00 today. When I had previously checked she was showing as being here until Wednesday.

As a follow up to the article there is this written question and answer from Kevan Jones https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2023-12-13/6767. The text of the question and answer is

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Answer of 28 March 2023 to Question 172353 on UK Border Force: Patrol Craft, what his Department's timescales are for the formal launch of market engagement for the procurement of replacement Border Force vessels.

Answer

Tom Pursglove

Conservative

Corby

Commons

Answered on

20 December 2023

Progress continues to be made on plans to procure a replacement Cutter and Coastal Patrol Vessel maritime capability for Border Force. The procurement schedule has not yet been finalised.

Good thing this is not an urgent problem then.

Broomtree ref 07.30 post I would agree. It would be interesting to see whether they go for one bidder or devide it into lots.

Broomtree ref 07.20 post if you google New Home Office Patrol Boat you will find the article.

At the time of the Austual MoU was announced a lot was made about bidding for the new border force vessels. I have just seen this article https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/21/border-force-hires-private-vessels-patrol-channel-new-fleet-delayed. There are similar articles in other papers. So it looks like this would be a repeat of the delays with FSS.

Lottie123 ref 18.03 post The main problem with increasing the number of vessels that the Navy has, apart from the slow speed of decision making by the MoD, is the lack of capacity. HARL, BAB and BAe are the only shipyards that can handle large Navy contracts. Once the upgrades are done at Belfast HARL should be able to do more shipbuilding. This would be needed if the Navy is to grow in size. Also, and we will see if this is true during the construction phase of FSS, the effect of the skills transfer and new equipment HARL should be able to complte builds quicker and to standard.

Forgot the link which is https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=5c6acd20-b744-457c-bd00-264b7438003d&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2024-01-29&utm_term=

This article deals with an intresting, to me, provisionin the Procurement Act that I had not picked up on. When the provision is in force every relevant tender has to have three KPIs which the contract is monitored against. The KPIs will be published as will reports on performance against the KPIs. These requirements would apply to all public sector contracts. Therefore, if HARL was to enter into any contracts with other public sector bodies they would still apply. It would be interesting to see how BAB and BAe manage with this provision.

Consuela ref 08.19 post as was seen with the marine license regardless of their political views they will applyn the law. If there is no legal reason to not fund in full or part IslandMagee then it will be funded. It is legally impermissible to say that you will not grant an application before the application has been made as that would amount to an unlawful fettering of discretion.

Brinoble ref 23.04 post I think that this move may be critical to a decision on the funding of Islandmagee. I recall seeing a list of decisions awaiting a return of the NI Executive and one of them if I recall correctly was to engage a consultant to see how IslandMagee could be funded. My concern with the DUP Executive decision is that the executive is so large that any agreement would prove impossible.

There is this article which was previewed in the UK Defence Journal https://www.geostrategy.org.uk/research/why-britain-needs-a-larger-navy/ that makes the reasonable argument that the UK needs a larger navy. The US Head of the Navy recently said the same. In addition Penny Mordaunt has said similar and going further saying the entire military needs more funding. So there seems to be a consensus that the Navy is too small. Question is will the government listen?

LSE03 ref 16.54 post thanks for this. I wonder if there is a similar project near Methil. I do not recall hearing about one.

Just seen this on Navy Lookout's twitter feed. https://twitter.com/NavyLookout/status/1751175348153151947 the text of the post is

Govt Minister @jcartlidgemp

confirms that on current plans, the last Type 45 Destroyer will retire from service by the end of 2038.

Less than 15 years left to design and build the complete replacement class of Type 83 destroyers /FADS.

https://theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2024

If Team Resolute does well with the FSS contract then they may have a chance with the Type 45s contract whenever that will be.

Bubble2021 ref 08.51 post The deepwater terminal at Stornoway will be used for two things. Firstly to improve the tourist visits by allowing for cruise ships to dock there. Secondly and more importantly for HARL shareholders raw materials to fabricate wind turbines will be taken into H+W Arnish via river at Arnish Point I think it is called. The finished products will then be taken down the new link road to the deepwater terminal. Yes the link road is wide enough for this.

I thought I read somewhere that Stornoway Authority is connected in ssomeway with at least one windfarm development.

Bubble2021 ref 19.04 If you believe in conspiracy theories and I do not around about the time that the SP went up there was an eight trade not sure if that means anything. We also ended the day with an eight trade.

Scaffman ref 17.58 post If you read my post carefully I am only disagreeing on the likelihood of Arnish benefiting. I maintain that Arnish will definitely benefit as opposed to LSE03 who believes Arnish should benefot so I am more bullish than LSE03.