Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Vere of Norbiton on 22 May (HL15602), whether they would drop a stated qualifying condition for a bidder for the West Coast Partnership rail franchise without informing other registered bidders; and if not, why they cannot answer the question put on the grounds of it being a live competition.
Answered by Baroness Vere of Norbiton - Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Department evaluates tenders for the West Coast Partnership in accordance with the processes set out in the Invitation to Tender. This is done to ensure the Department meets its obligations to treat all bidders fairly and equally. The Department does not comment on live competitions in compliance with its contractual and legal obligations.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether FirstGroup has met all Department of Transport criteria on railways pensions as a shortlisted bidder for the West Coast Partnership rail franchise.
Answered by Baroness Vere of Norbiton - Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Department does not comment on a live competition. Please note that all bids received for any franchise competition are evaluated against the requirements and instructions set out in the relevant Invitation To Tender.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government when they last talked with Greybull Capital about it contributing to the costs incurred by the Government in repatriating Monarch passengers after the airline collapsed.
Answered by Baroness Vere of Norbiton - Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
Greybull Capital is not itself a shareholder in Monarch Airlines but it does perform an advisory and management role for the principal shareholder, Petrol Jersey Limited. There is no formal legal mechanism we can use to oblige Greybull to contribute towards the cost of repatriating passengers.
However Marc Meyohas, partner at Greybull, wrote to the Transport Select Committee acknowledging a moral obligation (if they make a profit) to contribute and help to defray the costs incurred by the Government in repatriating Monarch customers.
Discussions with Greybull in relation to recovering the costs of the repatriation operation have been in writing. Ministers last wrote to Greybull on this matter on 5 December 2018.
The extent of any profit or loss from Greybull Capital and Petrol Jersey Limited’s investment in Monarch Airlines will depend on the outcome of the administration process, which is not due to conclude until October 2020.
I refer to the Written Ministerial Statement made by the Secretary of State on 9 May 2019, which reported that the final cost to the taxpayer from the Monarch repatriation have been assessed to be £40.5m. This does not include any contribution from Greybull Capital or the principal shareholder, Petrol Jersey Limited. We do not expect any material change to the final cost to the taxpayer.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Sugg on 12 March (HL14267), whether the contribution promised by Greybull to meet part of the cost incurred by taxpayers in repatriating customers of Monarch Airlines is dependent on the completion of the administration of the Monarch group of companies; and when ministers last met Greybull in connection with Greybull's contribution to costs.
Answered by Baroness Vere of Norbiton - Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
Greybull Capital is not itself a shareholder in Monarch Airlines but it does perform an advisory and management role for the principal shareholder, Petrol Jersey Limited. There is no formal legal mechanism we can use to oblige Greybull to contribute towards the cost of repatriating passengers.
However Marc Meyohas, partner at Greybull, wrote to the Transport Select Committee acknowledging a moral obligation (if they make a profit) to contribute and help to defray the costs incurred by the Government in repatriating Monarch customers.
Discussions with Greybull in relation to recovering the costs of the repatriation operation have been in writing. Ministers last wrote to Greybull on this matter on 5 December 2018.
The extent of any profit or loss from Greybull Capital and Petrol Jersey Limited’s investment in Monarch Airlines will depend on the outcome of the administration process, which is not due to conclude until October 2020.
I refer to the Written Ministerial Statement made by the Secretary of State on 9 May 2019, which reported that the final cost to the taxpayer from the Monarch repatriation have been assessed to be £40.5m. This does not include any contribution from Greybull Capital or the principal shareholder, Petrol Jersey Limited. We do not expect any material change to the final cost to the taxpayer.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Sugg on 6 March (HL14064), whether conversations involving officials and Arklow Shipping took place before the Department for Transport entered into an agreement or signed heads of forms with Seaborne Freight.
Answered by Baroness Sugg
Support from Arklow formed part of the conditions precedent to the contract. Information from Arklow was provided in accordance with the condition of the initial agreement.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Sugg on 28 February (HL13791), how much of the cost to the taxpayer of repatriating customers of Monarch airlines to the UK has been met by the owners or associates, including Greybull Capital, of the airline.
Answered by Baroness Sugg
To date the Government has not received any payment from Greybull or Monarch’s investors. The administration of the Monarch group of companies continues and the Government is finalising contributions from the travel industry. We are grateful for the companies that have contributed to the costs of repatriating their customers, demonstrating their corporate social responsibility.
Following on from the experience of Monarch, the Secretary of State for Transport commissioned an independent Airline Insolvency Review which is expected to report by spring 2019.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Sugg on 21 February (HL13660), whether any Ministers or officials have met representatives or agents of Arklow Shipping Limited in connection with Seaborne Freight.
Answered by Baroness Sugg
There were a number of conversations involving officials and Arklow Shipping before it withdrew support, leading to termination of the Department’s contract with Seaborne.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how much progress has been made in recovering from the owners of Monarch Airlines the costs incurred by UK taxpayers in repatriating that airline’s passengers.
Answered by Baroness Sugg
The Government has made good progress in recovering monies from a variety of sources including credit card companies and tour operators. We are grateful for the companies that have contributed to the costs of repatriating their customers, demonstrating their corporate social responsibility and encourage others to follow their example.
In October 2017 we estimated that the total cost of the repatriation operation would be £60m. The actual cost of the repatriation operation is currently estimated to be about £50m and we do not expect this number to change significantly. Following on from the experience of Monarch, the Secretary of State for Transport commissioned an independent Airline Insolvency Review which is expected to report by spring 2019.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they have taken to repatriate UK passengers stranded overseas by the collapse of Flybmi; and whether they intend to take action to minimise the cost of such repatriations to the UK taxpayer.
Answered by Baroness Sugg
The Department recognises that this is a disruptive time for passengers, and the government’s immediate priority is to support those affected.
The Department of Transport is working closely with the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and the travel industry to ensure that the collapse of Flybmi is managed with minimal impact to affected passengers. Given the number of consumers affected, the CAA believes that there is sufficient capacity available in the market to repatriate passengers as necessary. The CAA has put in place comprehensive consumer advice to allow passengers to make their own travel arrangements. The majority of such passengers will be able to recover costs through their credit / debit card bookings, or from travel insurance. A significant number of affected passengers also hold tickets from other airlines who will be responsible for making alternative flights. The CAA has also received a strong positive response to its request to industry to make discounted rescue fares available, and details have been made available on the CAA website. These actions ensure that the cost of repatriation to the UK will not be borne by HMG and therefore UK taxpayers.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government which advisers were used by the Department of Transport to conduct due diligence on Arklow Shipping Limited in connection to the award of a shipping contract to Seabourne Freight; and whether any ministers or officials met representatives or agents of Arklow Shipping Limited as part of that process.
Answered by Baroness Sugg
Due diligence was undertaken for all three ferry freight contracts at a level proportionate to the Department's prospective contractual relations. In recognition that Seaborne Freight was a start-up business, the contract with Seaborne required them to provide evidence about its financial backers. In part because of the withdrawal of Arklow Shipping, Seaborne was unable to provide this evidence to satisfy these contractual milestones, contributing to Secretary of State’s decision unilaterally to terminate the contract.