Member Info for stokey12

Some of you might find this of interest https://twitter.com/CommonsDefence/status/1726575564696531065

For those of you who do not know HARL has outsourced its Investor Relations and this function is now being handled by harlandwolff@radnorcp.com.

LSE03 ref 12.03 post I wonder if H+W Technologies are aware of this technology as it looks like something that can cut down the time it takes to build simple blocks.

Scaffman ref 10.06 post I am sure you realise that the Act only applies to Public Sector contracts. I therefore presume you meant that it applies to Pubic Sector contracts with the various sectors. If that is the case I would disagree with you as the Act was designed as a Post Brexit piece of legislation to replace the previous EU procurement rules.

I have not posted here for sometime but remain invested. I am not sure if anyone has anyway of contacting the significant shareholders. I checked the company website and this is what I found

The two largest investors in EQTEC are:

Altair Group Investment (19.0%)

Amati Global Investors: (5.43%)

Last updated 6 January 2022. For more information please visit.

I am not sure if there has been any changes since then. I will be voting against the proposals outlined in the RNS as I do not feel they are in the interests of shareholders generally. That said if we are to block the proposals we need to get the insittutional shareholders, if any, to support us.

Scaffman ref 08.36 post I do not think it is aimed at any particular sector. My view is that it is to prevent contracts going to Asia and other low wage cost countries. With the new criteria of most advantageous tender even if you have lowest bid you can lose a bid to another tenderer where there bid is considered more advantageous.

This article covers the changes under the Procurement Act 2023 and is of relevance as it would cover any tender with a Pubic Sector body and not just Central Government. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=7ba8fd0c-0a05-468e-8ec0-76933d9870ad&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2023-11-20&utm_term=

One important note for those who do not want to read the whole thing is this 'One of the most symbolic reforms in the Act is the move to require evaluation criteria to identify the "most advantageous tender" rather than the "most economically advantageous tender". This change is designed to encourage public sector buyers to take a broader view and consider strategic priorities such as the creation of new local jobs, tackling climate change, and fostering innovation when evaluating tender responses, although contracting authorities should not read too much into the change as other requirements (for example for criteria to relate to the subject matter of the contract) are still present in the Act.'

This provision seems to allow for a higher cost tender to be awarded as it is more advantageous than others. Such a provision may assist BAB and BAe who are not very good at putting in cost effective tenders.

Just seen this on the UK Defence Journal twitter feed https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/britains-armed-forces-equipment-by-the-numbers/ On the maritime side does not look good\

Si_Derman ref 10.04 Thanks for that link. I did not realise I had not posted the link which is embarassing having pulled halfpenny up for the same thing.

Halfpenny ref 09.26 post If you are going to quoe from a publication can you please cite the source.

Just seen this giving figures for defence exports in 2022. So looks promising if HARL wants to target the defence export market.

Kaeren ref 18.37 post thanks for this. On a quick read I am not sure that a Non Competitive Action can be justified as I am not sure if there is another possible ferry operator that can provide the s ervcie at the price the Scottish Government are willing to pay. Also it does not help that they seem to be waiting until the last minute to make a decision.

LSE03 ref 17.07 post The Scottish Government are running a risk here if they are going to make a decision next summer for a contract that expires in September they better pray that nobody challenges a direct award. As it would risk the matter being tied up in legal disputes for years

In 1993/94 as part of my degree I studied contract law and CalMac were running the ferries then and had been for sometime. I therefore have little confidence that giving them a new contract would do anything to improve things as they have no incentive to improve as the contracts will just get extended regardless of how badly they perform. I am not sure if a direct award would be legal.

Drango ref 13.39 post tanks but the law has changed since then and it is possible that today a similar bid may not go through. I note without further comment that this was during the John Major government.

Just seenn this article https://www.adsadvance.co.uk/ukef-deal-with-embraer-to-benefit-british-businesses.html If this kind of agreement is replicated in areas like shipbuilding and renewables it might benefit HARL in securing work.

Halfpenny ref 08.25 post I do not see Austal at this stage a potential suitor. Like with Navantia they are more a strategic partner. When the RNS first came out about the MoU I was trying to see what the benefit was. However, with all the press articles over the last two days the rationale is clear. Austal wants to break into the UK Defence Market and HARL wants their expertise. Even with AUKUS I am not sure that HMG would sanction a bid from an Australian company for HARL. In addition there are the non core assets of HARL that would need managing prior to any disposal. So I am not convinced that at present the MoU is a precursor to any kind of a bid for HARL.

Si_Derman ref 17.02 post I meant replaced as in instead of one coming from Belfast you have one coming from Methil. Unless of course two were going to be delivered one from Belfast and one from Methil.

Si_Derman ref 16.36 post that would replace Cory Barge 7 which was going to depart from Belfast today but it is scheduled to depart next week tug permitting.

This has been posted by Ben Murray. I note that HARL will be responding but if anybody has any expertise in this area and wants to make a submission you can do.

Hot on the heels of yesterday's CfD Sustainable Industry Rewards consultation by the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, the House of Commons Energy Security and Net Zero Committee has today launched an inquiry examining the potential for UK manufacturing to play a greater role in the supply chain for low-carbon energy projects and the Government support available.

Both of these developments suggest a real recognition that we need to do more to deliver value from new renewables projects for local communities - often coastal communities that underperform in socio-economic outcomes. We have a responsibility to deliver more tangible benefits from the rapid growth in new industries for these communities.

The committee is asking:

1) How can UK plc capture its fair share of the economic potential of emerging or less developed energy technologies?

2) What more can the Government do to encourage greater domestic supply chain investment in the energy industry by 2035, including through the Contracts for Difference scheme?

3) Does the UK have the supply chain capacity to deliver the required energy infrastructure by 2035, including an expanded electricity network?

4) To what extent would growing the domestic supply chain bolster UK energy security?

5) What are the key concerns with respect to the availability of raw materials in the supply chain and how might those be addressed?

Harland & Wolff will be responding and we'd encourage others across the renewables supply chain to do so too.

The energy transition presents a generational opportunity for communities across the UK and we have a responsibility to grasp it with quality, sustainable jobs throughout the supply chain. A close partnership between industry and government is vital to get this right.

The joint Maritime UK and RenewableUK Offshore Wind Plan (https://lnkd.in/eJmFmrTa), published in March this year, sets out a series of good recommendations on how we can grow the domestic supply chain for renewables.

Angus MacNeil

Securing the domestic supply chain - Committees - UK Parliament

committees.parliament.uk • 1 min read

The Committee has launched an inquiry examining the potential for UK manufacturing to play a greater role in the supply chain for low-carbon energy projects and the Government support available. The inquiry’s proposed aims are: To determine how well...