The alert system explained on Wiki:

The BIKINI state was an alert state indicator previously used by the UK Ministry of Defence to warn of non-specific forms of threat, including civil disorder, terrorism or war. Signs giving the current alert state were displayed at the entrance to government buildings and military installations. It was established on 19 May 1970. According to the Ministry of Defence, the wordbikini was randomly selected by a computer.^[1]

Whilst similar to the DEFCON alert states used in the United States, the BIKINI levels were defined by the section of the military or organisation rather than UK-wide, and as a result, countermeasures and reactions to differing states may differ as acutely as from building to building. The highest levels of alert, RED and AMBER, were only intended to be maintained for limited times. The WHITE state has never been used in the history of the system.

It was replaced by a more general and public terrorism alert status, UK Threat Levels, an alert state system in use by the British government since 1 August 2006.

• Red = Information has been received about an attack on a specific target. It can also mean “red alert”, meaning the United Kingdom is at war, especially if there’s a likelihood of a nuclear strike .
• Amber = There has been specific information received and there is a substantial threat to government targets. It can also mean “high alert”, which could be a transition to war.
• Black Special = There is an increased likelihood of an attack, but no defined target. It can also mean “potential terrorist threat”.
• Black = There has been an assessment made that there is the possibility of an attack, but no defined target. It can also mean “possible civil unrest”, meaning safety can’t be guaranteed.
• White = No information available about a specific threat. It can also mean “situation stable”

The Guardian has also learned that a £14bn PFI project – one of the largest ever – to finance a military training academy in Wales is likely to be scrapped as part of the strategic defence review, to be published later this month. The new centre at a 1,000-acre site near Barry is intended to consolidate the three armed services’ existing training facilities around the country, able to cater for up to 3,000 students at any one time. The 30-year contract, awarded to defence firm Qinetiq and US firm Raytheon, covers staff, catering and maintenance.

But the cost has already increased from the original estimate of £12bn to a figure closer to £14bn, while the government has made clear its dislike of PFI-style contracts.

One senior defence source described its future as “pretty bleak” and its fate could also be sealed at the national security council meeting. Officials say the work by the consortium – already costing the MoD more than £80m – has not provided what is required. A spokesman for the consortium argued that it would be “illogical” to scrap the new centre because it would free up 1,200 sailors, soldiers and airmen involved in the military’s existing training programme.

A Government source has said the £14 billion private finance initiative project, awarded by the Labour administration, is unlikely to be given the green light by the present Conservative/Lib Dem coalition because of the huge costs.

It opens up the possibility of studies for a much lower cost replacement which could mean a reprieve for RAF Cosford and secure its future. Mr O’Harney said they believed the programme for the new facility at St Athan had been flawed since its inception.

He said the cost of the facility had soared from £11bn to £14bn in the space of three years.

The source said: “The logic for something on that site remains compelling. The model does not. It’s not impossible that something will go ahead – but it won’t be a gargantuan PFI.”

St Athan has been viewed as vulnerable as the coalition is keen to axe £20bn of defence contracts structured as PFIs – and the St Athan project is not yet under contract.

• The full article can be viewed here.

Some of the key motions that were put to the conference:

Anti Cuts

The Group Executive Committee (GEC) raised a motion that highlighted the significant reduction of staffing level since New Labour came into power.  It also  mentioned the independant review of MoD civil servants that is headed by Gerry Grimstone which will lead to more cuts.

The motion called for the following:

• a new redundancy and pre-redundancy process to be put in place

• an agreement to be negotiated that ensures the re-deployment pool is managed correctly

• to resist attempts of enforced mobility

• protection of members from compulsory redundancy when their work is privatised

• to ensure greater accountability and scrutiny in respect of the equipment program

• to campaign to end wasteful privatisation

The motion was carried without debate.

Atracting New Members

The motion called on the GEC to invest time, publicity and funds to ensure that there was a full network of regional committees to support and mentor activists at a branch level.

This motion was heavily debated and ultimately the branch agreed to remit the motion and allow the GEC to look into the issue.

Standard PCS Logo

This motion called for the standard PCS logo to be used on all official communications to ensure that it didn’t look like the Group was operating independently from the National body.  After a heated debate the motion was lost.

Defence Training Review

This motion instructed the GEC to campaign against the Department working towards getting approval for package 1 of the Defence Training Review prior to the outcome of the Strategic Defence Review.  This motion was carried.

Other issues discussed were; constitutional amendments, anti-cuts, pay, organisation, industrial relations, equality & diversity, campaigning & privatisation, MoD Guard Service, environment, terms & conditions, personnel, policy and recruitment,  learning & training, staff surplus and valedictory.  The list of motions can be found here.

The outcome of the motions is as follows: A1 – carried, A2 – carried, A3 – carried, A4 – carried, A5 – carried, A6 – carried, A7 – carried, A8 – carried, A9 – Remitted, A10 – carried, A11 – carried, A12 – Lost, A13 – carried, A14 – carried, A15 – remitted, A16 – carried, A17 carried, A18 – carried, A19 – carried, A20 – carried, A21 – carried, A22 – carried, A23 – carried, A24 – carried, A25 – carried, A26 – remitted, A27 carried, A28 – remitted, A29 carried, A30 – carried, A31 – carried, A32 – carried, A33 – carried, A34 – carried, A35 – carried, A36 – carried, A37 – carried, A38 – carried, A39 – carried, A40 – carried, A41 – carried, A42 – carried, A43 – carried, A44 – carried, A45 – remitted, A46 – carried, A47 – carried, A48 – carried, A55 – carried and A59 carried.

In addition to the motions and debating there was also a session on organising around and industrial dispute.  Everyone was encouraged to join in and share experiences and successes from the recent industrial action.

Both the Group and the main conference were a little tame this year with many motions getting carried without any proper debate. Both conferences had key people missing. The MoD Group conference was missing it’s President, Chris Dando, who had recently fallen over and broken his shoulder. The main conference was missing the General Secretary, Mark Serwotka, who is undergoing tests in a London hospital for a heart problem.

I only attended one fringe meeting this year because most of them didn’t appeal to me. This  made it easier for me to find time to eat and network with people from other branches. The fringe meeting I did attend was called ‘Anti-privatisation’ which discussed the privatisation of public services. I managed to get an unexpected round of applause when there were problems getting the slide show started, so I got up and helped out.

I nearly forgot to mention that I walked an astounding 43 miles over the week.  I clocked up 10 miles in one day alone!!! Due to a lack of planning the group hotel was over 2 miles away from the Group conference venue. The Brighton Centre where the main conference is held is also quite a trek, but thankfully not quite so far.

It was a hectic but fun week and after the scramble through London with our luggage, we caught the leisurely Wrexham & Shropshire train which is like stepping back into a different era. Just what we needed after such a hectic week. Now all I need to do is gather my thoughts and catch up on some sleep   After which I shall post in more detail about some of the issues that were debated.

We meet in Brighton just after the 6 May general election, but we know that whoever is leading the government will be targeting public services and our members’ jobs, pay and pensions.

We have already taken three days of strike action in March 2010 in defence of the Civil Service Compensation Scheme – and that dispute is not over.  the strikes have been well supported and demonstrated that members are not prepared to accept their terms and conditions being torn up.

Public services are under greater threat than ever before, but they did not cause the economic crisis and the recession.  We face some real battles alongside many of our sister unions, and the debates at conference will reflect these important struggles ahead.*

• The sun decided to come out eventually on our last morning. about 21 hours ago via txt

• Janice Godrich is currently closing PCS conference 2010. 12:24 PM May 21st via txt

• Caroline Lucas MP (first green MP) addresses the conference. 10:26 AM May 21st via txt

• Final conference session well underway. Discussing pay, environmental and social & economic issues. 10:15 AM May 21st via txt

• This motion was fiercely debated by the delegates. Some obviously more informed than others. 4:28 PM May 20th via txt

• delegates voted for a PCS information campaign for the immediate withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan. 4:26 PM May 20th via txt

• Standing orders were suspended to announce that unite won in the court of appeal in relation to the BA ballot. 12:25 PM May 20th via txt

• The sacked Jane Brook seconded the motion & spoke on the surveillance of her family prior to her dismissal. 12:18 PM May 20th via txt

• The motion to support members who are victimised for making personal injury claims was passed unanimously. 12:14 PM May 20th via txt

• After the card count the motion was passed. 12:08 PM May 20th via txt

• The motion instructing the NEC to stand trade union candidates in elections was hotly debated & went to card vote. 12:06 PM May 20th via txt

• Chris Baugh presented the PCS organising strategy & spoke on the re-launch of the Imembership system. 12:01 PM May 20th via txt

• He also spoke on the upcoming leadership contest. 4:26 PM May 19th via txt

• John McDonall addressed the conference and spoke of the need to re-establish democracy within the labour party. 4:25 PM May 19th via txt

• This was passed by the delegates. 4:21 PM May 19th via txt

• The headline motion called for co-ordinated public sector campaigning in light of the current threats to jobs & services. 4:20 PM May 19th via txt

• She outlined our current situation and our need to be organised for the coming storm. 4:14 PM May 19th via txt

• Janice Godrich opened the conference & apologised for Mark Serwatka being unable to attend. 4:12 PM May 19th via txt

• This afternoon i visited the Royal Pavillion gardens. 4:29 PM May 18th via txt

• National conference starts tomorrow morning. 4:27 PM May 18th via txt

• No debate on the motions so it sailed along without hitches. 4:26 PM May 18th via txt

• Group conference finished at lunch time. 4:24 PM May 18th via txt

• Everyone in the hall was encouraged to join in and debate issues surrounding the recent action. 6:44 PM May 17th via txt

• The afternoon session was a debate about organising around an industrial dispute. 6:42 PM May 17th via txt

• Most motions were carried without debate, although a few were debated extensively. 6:40 PM May 17th via txt

• The first day of group conference is now over. 6:37 PM May 17th via txt

• Group conference is underway. 10:33 AM May 17th via txt

• Registering at the hotel was a bit faulty towers again. 10:32 AM May 17th via txt

• The train is now going backwards!!! 2:22 PM May 16th via txt

• talking politics & life with a man from Siberia. 2:01 PM May 16th via txt

• Now on the train to london. 9:42 AM May 16th via txt

• All present & correct & on the first leg of the journey. 9:08 AM May 16th via txt

I have scheduled some other posts to keep you entertained whilst I am away. If I haven’t messed it up and the server holds out, they will be appearing below this post each day.

Update 22 May 2010:  I am back from the conference now so I have converted the tweets into this permanent post.

*From the conference guide 2010.

By the time your receive this letter, we are hoping that you will have taken time to reflect on your attack on MoD civil servants’ bonuses and realised it was a serious error on your part and a total misjudgment; and be aware of the strength of feeling, anger and frustration that your attack on staff working in defence has caused.

On the back of the furore about MP’s expenses, I am surprised you have got the gall to criticise civil servants about their bonus awards.  In the past few months there has been a constant drip feed of untruths fed into the public domain by the press, media, ministers and MPs about the pay and conditions, pension entitlements, and now bonus awards of civil servants.  We wonder why this is; of course it is to do with the run up to the general election and an attempt to turn the attention away from the MP’s expenses scandal.  Manipulation of statistics for you own political ends can, and indeed does hide the important facts.  The peddling of untruths has given the wrong impression to the general public and more importantly the electorate about MoD civil servants.  They think we are overpaid, receive large bonus awards and gold plated pensions.  This is so far from the truth and you are well aware of this.  So let’s once and for all set the record straight with the real facts that are relevant to us, beginning with the bonus award.

Bonus awards
Before tax, the standard bonus which myself and my wife received was £390 and is a non-pensionable and non-consolidated one off payment, which is what the majority of civil servants received.  Civilian bonuses have become an increasing feature of pay systems throughout the civil service and not just the MoD and is a proportion of the overall pay bill.  As these bonuses are not consolidated or pensionable it is a way of giving us a cheaper pay rise.  But you are already aware of this and choose to manipulate the facts for your own political ends.  Rather than receive a paltry bonus we would prefer a decent pay rise and to be valued by politicians for the work we do in support of the armed forces.

Pay
As part of the imposed pay deal, we have had a reduction in our salary of over £3,500 each as a result of a reduction in the E1 grade salary maxima, which equates to a 15% reduction in salary.  This reduction in salary has only happened to the lowest paid MoD civil servants and not to the higher grades.  We both receive £20,074 and that is after working in the civil service for a combined total of over 50 years, myself for 27 years and my wife for 23 years.  Starting salaries are as low as £14,500 and recently over 1,000 MoD civilians had to receive emergency payments because their pay had fallen below the national minimum wage.

The role of the MoD civilian is to support the armed forces and we do in fact cost less than service personnel.  This frees service personnel up to do other tasks.

Pension entitlements
Of course we are going to have the luxury of a golden plated pension upon our retirement.  In the real world away from the headlines of bumper pay offs for mandarins, most civil servants will on average receive a pension of £6,000 and if you take away the high earners, the average falls to just £4,200.  At the moment 61,000 civil service pensioners only receive a gross pension of between £1,000 and £2,000 per year.  These figures as you can see are far from astronomical sums and will not doubt keep us in poverty in our retirement as we will probably just scrape past the threshold for claiming pension credits.

On the horizon in the MoD, we face a reduction of over 25,000 civilian staff and it appears to us that we are being punished with these job cuts, reduced pay and pensions for the indiscretions of the private sector and in particular the banking industry who have brought our economy to the brink of collapse.

As a married couple with no children we do not qualify for any benefit of any kind or tax credits and we have yet to reach the so-called average salary figure even after working in the civil service for a combined total of 50 years.  So I hope you can now understand our frustration and anger at this constant misrepresentation of civilian defence staff (and the civil service as a whole) that appear constantly in the public domain.

We refuse to be used as pawns in your political machinations in the run up to the general election.  All we ask of you and politicians alike is rather than trying to create a false divide between the armed forces and civilian staff, is to recognise that MoD civilians and our armed forces are part of the same team.

We, more than most, know of the sacrifices that our armed forces make on our behalf and fully support them because they deserve to be supplied with the best equipment and to be recompensed fully for the work they do at home and abroad.

I hope you can take these points on board and take every opportunity you can to tell the public the real truth about MoD civilians instead of political point scoring.

A recent edition of DefenceFocus featured an interview with Jon Thompson, MoD Director General of Finance, who oversees the MoD’s £35 billion budget. Within the interview he exposes some of the myths portrayed in the media:

DF:  How much media coverage about the MoD’s coffers is true?
JT: Some of it is not accurate. It’s difficult to pin down a percentage.  There was a most interesting front-page in a national daily newspaper recently when I was with my father-in-law.  He said: “Look at that, it’s terrible!”  I told him that is was completely made-up.  I attempted to tell him the real situation and he said: “I didn’t know that.”  “No,”  I replied, “That’s because it’s not reported in the media.”  Some of it is on the verge of being made up, some of it is poorly informed and some is true.

DF:  Will the recession put more civilian jobs at risk in 2010?
JT: Not next year, no.  In 2010/11, we know what our funding is, which was settled in the spending review in 2007.  The debating years are from 2011/12 and beyond when a new government will decide about funding for all departments, not just MoD.  There are very different views between the political parties about the funding of public services and tackling public sector deficit.  Therefore it is very hard to say because it very much depends on who wins the election and what approach they take.

DF:  The press claim that Forces’ kit is out-of-date by the time it enters service.  Is this fair?
JT: No. We strive to provide the best equipment that we can, with the budget we have got.  Yes, it’s right that sometimes it takes a long time to develop these things.  We are constantly pushing at the boundaries of science and some things are very cutting edge.  Very often, we are the first people to do something or we’re just behind other leading countries.  My observation is that different countries prioritise in different ways.  Some countries might have slightly better kit than us in one area but worse kit in another.  There is always debate but how do you judge?  It’s a difficult issue.

DF:  Do you really believe the MoD offers value for money?
JT: To me it’s a pretty good insurance policy for £35bn.  I’d much rather we had it than didn’t.  There are clearly political differences about the Armed Forces and deterrent.  But I think it is good value.

Within the interview Jon points out that that the MoD have reduced civil servants by 45,000 in the last 12 years and that there may still be more reductions.

In  January 2007, RAF Cosford learned that their bid for the Defence Training Review contract had failed.  Following that announcement there have been many delays and setbacks, causing the proposed move to St Athan to go over-budget and behind schedule.  No surprises there then!

You can follow some of the twists and turns of the campaign here.

Over the weekend it was reported that although planning permission for building the new academy had been granted by Vale of Glamorgan council in September 2009, the decision to go ahead has been delayed until July this year.  After the general election…

From Wales Online:

David Cameron attacks Government over St Athan plans Jan 09 2010

CONSERVATIVE leader David Cameron yesterday attacked the Government for not making a clear decision about the future of the proposed £13bn Defence Training College in St Athan ahead of this year’s general election.

He did not pledge to support the landmark project – predicted to create more than 5,000 jobs – but condemned Labour’s stance as “disingenuous”.

On Thursday, the MoD confirmed the final sign-off would not take place until after the election, meaning the decision may fall to an incoming Conservative government.

Armed Forces Minister Bill Rammell said: “Plans have advanced considerably, but the work has exceeded the assumptions made in 2008 and hence the change to when the investment decision will be taken…the project is on track for an investment decision in the summer.”

Mr Cameron said: “We recognise the importance of this project and totally see the logic of bringing together these services. I think the Government is being disingenuous with their announcement.

“They are still the Government and they have had plenty of time to make a decision about this. After all, the Vale of Glamorgan council granted planning permission for the scheme last September.

“We will have a proper strategic defence review if we win the election.”

This drew a fiery response from Labour Rhondda MP Chris Bryant.

What Chris Bryant said

He said: “He’s the man who’s been refusing to sign on the dotted line. He’s the person committed to swingeing cuts.

“He’s the person who’s been saying that in this present year we should be making cuts.”

Mr Bryant was adamant the proposed training centre, which was suggested as a possible target for cuts by Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman Vince Cable last year, would save money.

He said: “It wouldn’t save any money not to do it, which is why I think Vince Cable was so daft when he said what he said and why I think Cameron and the Tories have not understood the situation.”

From BBC News:

A final decision on a proposed £12bn defence academy will not be made until the summer, the UK government says.

The Defence Technical College (DTC) is set to create more than 2,000 jobs at St Athan, by providing specialist training for all the armed services.

Armed forces minister Bill Rammell said extra work on the deal meant a delay to plans to make a decision in the spring.

Vale of Glamorgan MP John Smith said there could be “no doubt whatsoever” at UK ministers’ commitment to the scheme.

Planning permission for the DTC was granted by Vale of Glamorgan council in September last year, although the final say on the go-ahead rests with the Ministry of Defence (MoD).

Construction was due to begin late this year, with the college billed to provide specialist engineering, communications and information systems training to all the UK’s armed forces, bringing them together in one location on new premises.