The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
A former Goldman Sachs banker in charge of private contracts for the Department for Transport was named yesterday as one of the officials suspended for their alleged role in the West Coast rail franchise fiasco. Kate Mingay, head of commercial at the DfT, is believed to be the most senior of three staff suspended on Wednesday. She ran a team responsible for the finance model in the bidding for the West Coast Main Line franchise. The decision to strip Sir Richard Branson's company, Virgin Trains, of the multibillion-pound contract and award it to FirstGroup instead was scrapped after the Transport Secretary, Patrick McLoughlin, said there were "significant technical flaws" in the bidding process because of the DfT's mistakes.Ms Mingay was also part of a team which approved the controversial decision to place a £1.4bn order for new Thameslink trains with the German firm Siemens, rather than the Derby train-maker Bombardier.
A former Goldman Sachs banker in charge of private contracts for the Department for Transport was named yesterday as one of the officials suspended for their alleged role in the West Coast rail franchise fiasco. Kate Mingay, head of commercial at the DfT, is believed to be the most senior of three staff suspended on Wednesday.
She ran a team responsible for the finance model in the bidding for the West Coast Main Line franchise. The decision to strip Sir Richard Branson's company, Virgin Trains, of the multibillion-pound contract and award it to FirstGroup instead was scrapped after the Transport Secretary, Patrick McLoughlin, said there were "significant technical flaws" in the bidding process because of the DfT's mistakes.
Ms Mingay was also part of a team which approved the controversial decision to place a £1.4bn order for new Thameslink trains with the German firm Siemens, rather than the Derby train-maker Bombardier.
And, as I still believe, to respond to an agenda which was less about effective transport (and Virgin were certainly NOT that) than it was about cold hard cash (and not necessarily for the Treasury). keep to the Fen Causeway
The problem (as I'm seeing in my health service research at the moment) is that you have a set of civil servants who have a very simplistic view of markets and a religious belief in the power of "market-driven decisions."
This combines in this case to an excessive focus on the initial cost number (which First were lowest on) and no consideration of service levels or indeed of First's track record on bailing on later stage payments.
"The invisible hand would fix that, don't you know?"
As I say, I don't exclude other motives, but what's scary is how unnecessary they are to explain what happened.
In this case, the civil servant is a former "market" participant herself, so naivety may not be the main factor. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by Oui - Dec 5 6 comments
by gmoke - Nov 28
by Oui - Dec 617 comments
by Oui - Dec 612 comments
by Oui - Dec 56 comments
by Oui - Dec 41 comment
by Oui - Dec 21 comment
by Oui - Dec 152 comments
by Oui - Dec 16 comments
by gmoke - Nov 303 comments
by Oui - Nov 3012 comments
by Oui - Nov 2838 comments
by Oui - Nov 2713 comments
by Oui - Nov 2511 comments
by Oui - Nov 24
by Oui - Nov 221 comment
by Oui - Nov 22
by Oui - Nov 2119 comments
by Oui - Nov 1615 comments
by Oui - Nov 154 comments
by Oui - Nov 1319 comments