An agreement to construct tug boats for the Royal Navy’s operations at HMNB Portsmouth is facing significant criticism, with some stakeholders describing the deal as “impossible to understand.” This contract, worth £200 million and part of a larger £850 million afloat services agreement, raises questions about transparency and local job security.
A total of 24 tug boats will be built by Damen Shipyards in the Netherlands. These vessels are intended to support logistical operations for the Royal Navy, including deployments from Portsmouth and two additional bases. According to Guy Barker, Serco’s maritime services director, this project is essential for enhancing the Ministry of Defence’s (MoD) auxiliary fleet. He highlighted a long-standing partnership between Serco and Damen, spanning over two decades.
The afloat services contract encompasses various maritime activities, such as towage, bunkering, and munitions services, ensuring efficient shipping movements across Portsmouth, Plymouth, and Scotland. Despite these operational goals, the agreement has sparked considerable controversy.
Concerns have been voiced by members of the Prospect Union, who fear that dockyard workers in Portsmouth could face redundancies due to the outsourcing of these contracts. Negotiations officer Nathan Morrison expressed worries about the potential limitations on operations involving vessels like the HMS Prince of Wales, a claim denied by the Royal Navy.
Adding to the controversy, Damen Shipyards is currently facing prosecution in the Netherlands for alleged breaches of Russian sanctions, linked to a bribery investigation that has been ongoing for eight years. Dutch authorities have stated that the allegations involve “goods and technology that could contribute to the military and technological strengthening of Russia.” Damen has firmly denied the accusations, asserting it has a robust compliance framework in place.
The criticisms of the tug boat contract have extended beyond Portsmouth. Union officials from GMB Scotland claimed the decision to award the contract to an overseas firm was made without consulting British shipyards. According to reporting from the Sunday Post, no UK shipbuilders were invited to bid for the agreement. Robert Deavy, a senior organiser for GMB Scotland, has called for the contract to be halted and reviewed, stating, “It is impossible to understand how a contract like this can be sent abroad without discussion with UK shipyards, unions, or ministers.”
Scotland’s business minister Richard Lochhead echoed these sentiments, urging the government to reform defence procurement processes to better facilitate bids from Scottish companies. In response to the criticism, the MoD clarified that Serco is free to establish its own supply chain and that there are no legal grounds to reject Damen as a subcontractor. They affirmed that action would be taken if any wrongdoing by Damen is proven.
As the situation unfolds, stakeholders from various sectors are closely monitoring the implications of this contract, both for local employment and the integrity of the procurement process within the defence sector. The outcomes could set precedents for future contracts and the involvement of domestic shipbuilders in government projects, highlighting the need for transparency and collaboration in national defence initiatives.
