The government says its proposals will modernise the service Plans to close coastguard centres around the UK would raise “serious safety concerns” and have little support, a report by MPs has said.
The government had wanted to reduce the number of coastguard centres open 24 hours a day from 18 to three.
But a Commons transport committee report said safety would be jeopardised if the proposals went ahead.
The government has already acknowledged the original proposals it was consulting on will be adapted.
Under the plans the coastguard service would have two nationally networked maritime operations centres, in Aberdeen and the Portsmouth-Southampton area.
There would be five sub-centres, operating in daylight hours only, in Falmouth, Humber, and Swansea. Two more sub-centres – in Belfast or Liverpool, and Stornoway or Shetland – will be retained.
In addition, there would be one sub-centre operating 24 hours a day in Dover, and the small centre at London would remain unchanged.
In May, Transport Secretary Philip Hammond said he was re-examining the plans, and would instead consider keeping nine, rather than three, coastguard stations open.
“The committee is not convinced by the government’s claim that technology can, at present, replace such local knowledge”
Louise Ellman Commons transport committee chairman
The original consultation was extended so that the committee could have more time to complete its assessment of the proposals.
The committee also said the decision to withdraw funding for emergency towing vessels – large tugs which intercept disabled ships to prevent pollution – was “unwise and short-sighted”, and was “inviting disaster”.
The committee’s chairman, Louise Ellman, said the coastguard proposals were “seriously flawed” and there was little support for them.
She also expressed her disappointment that shipping minister Mike Penning had “instructed regular coastguards not to give evidence to the committee”.
“We accept there is a need for some modernisation, but the government’s proposals for the future of the coastguard service are seriously flawed,” she said.
“We found little support for the current proposals and we have no confidence that… the coastguard will in future be able to respond to emergencies at sea as well as they do now, let alone in a more effective way.
“A drastic reduction in the number of rescue co-ordination centres will result in a loss of local knowledge among coastguard officers who are responsible for taking calls from people and vessels in distress.
“The committee is not convinced by the government’s claim that technology can, at present, replace such local knowledge.”
Mrs Ellman added that any future reorganisation of the service should be based on 24-hour centres, rather than stations which open only during daylight hours.
Steve Todd, National Maritime Secretary of the RMT transport union, said: “The committee quite rightly exposes the dangers to the UK coastline posed by the very damaging cutbacks and closures to coastguard centres.
“Also the report rightly recognises that the government is reckless in proposing to completely axe the Emergency Towing Vessels (ETVs) and the fire rescue cover provided by the Maritime Incident Report Group.
“The ETVs were specifically introduced following the Lord Donaldson report to guard against the safety and environmental threats posed to the UK coastline following the (1993) Braer and (1996) Sea Empress disasters, and are crucial to the safety of our members working in the maritime industries.”
Mr Penning has said the proposals are “not set in stone”.
Commenting on the committee’s report, Mr Hammond said: “I welcome the committee’s recognition that the coastguard service is in urgent need of modernisation.
“The original proposals do not compromise safety and include increased resources for front-line rescue services.
“Reform will improve resilience in the system through improvements to IT and create better career opportunities for staff, as well as better pay and conditions.”
The government’s final proposals are due to be published later this summer.
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.