Home
Local News
Parliament
Articles
Speeches
Richard
Media
South Norfolk
Contact

RSS
  Scheme for trawlermen is “classic Whitehall failure”
 

Over £42 million has since been paid
 to 4,400 former trawlermen or their
 dependents, around 63 per cent of
 claims received.

South Norfolk MP Richard Bacon has said that the scheme to compensate former Icelandic water trawlermen is a “classic Whitehall failure”, as a new report finds that the former Department of Trade and Industry did not plan the scheme properly. 

Mr Bacon said: “This scheme is a classic example of Whitehall’s failure to observe the basic principles of project management.  Civil servants sprung an untested and badly-planned scheme on an industry they did not understand, with no idea how they would assess any claims or in many cases, whether the payments which were made complied with their own rules”. 

Over £42 million has since been paid
 to 4,400 former trawlermen or their
 dependents, around 63 per cent of
 claims received.


“The Civil Service supposedly employs very bright people, yet this kind of failure happens again and again.  The government must make sure civil servants have the skills and experience necessary to make schemes like this work”. 

Mr. Bacon, MP for South Norfolk, was speaking as the Commons public accounts committee published its report on the compensation scheme for former Icelandic water trawlermen.  In July 2000 the former Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) announced a scheme to compensate former trawlermen who had lost their jobs following agreements between the UK and Icelandic governments at the end of the ‘Cod Wars’.  Over £42 million has since been paid to 4,400 former trawlermen or their dependents, around 63 per cent of claims received. 

The report finds that the DTI did not plan the project properly and did not test the impact of the scheme’s rules before launching the scheme.  The DTI did not give enough consideration to how it would obtain the evidence needed to support claims more than 20 years after the ‘Cod Wars’ ended.  The Department also failed to understand the working practices of the fishing industry when designing the scheme, and so set complex rules that were difficult to implement.  In 25 of 100 cases, there was insufficient evidence to say whether payments made by the Department accorded with the scheme’s rules.

26 February 2008