Proceeding contribution from Lord Campbell of Pittenweem (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 14 July 2011. It occurred during Ministerial statement on Coastguard Modernisation.
Coastguard Modernisation
My right hon. Friend predicted huge disappointment, and in that respect at least I can agree with him. The proposed closure of Forth in my constituency will be received with profound disappointment, not least because of the unsatisfactory nature of the public meeting held by the MCA in Anstruther in February. Is my right hon. Friend aware that Aberdeen, which he proposes to retain, is the most expensive station in the United Kingdom—that excludes staff costs—while Forth has the lowest running costs in the UK? Is he also aware that in 2010, 40% of lifeboat launches in Scotland took place within Forth's area of responsibility? The Forth station offers value for money, and is increasingly busy because of the increase in leisure and commercial traffic in and around the River Forth. Why on earth should it be a candidate for closure?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 531 c514
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Costs Management Public expenditure Rescue services Reorganisation Maritime and Coastguard Agency HM Coastguard
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 18:03:43 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_761330
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_761330
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_761330