President Arroyo's 2009 budget message includes the statement "we are funding the P2-billion Follow-On Search and Rescue Vessels Project to construct and commission ten 35-meter search and rescue vessels. Related to this, we are infusing some P2.0 billion for the protection of life and property at sea, including safeguarding the marine environment and resources, and enforcing all applicable maritime laws."

She signed the 2009 budget last August, and from what I read in the news, the budget is now in legislature. The troubling aspect of this follow-on SAR Vessels project is that apparently, these 10 additional vessels will be purchased again from Australia specifically from Tenix, an Australian shipbuilder.

Why on earth doesn't the Philippine coast guard give Filipino shipbuilders a chance to bid on these 10 SAR vessels? Why does the PCG/DOTC negotiate only directly with the Australians?

In news last month, it says the DOTC which is the mother agency of the coast guard has the second largest debt among the Philippine government agencies with a debt of $1.036 billion dollars !!! in GMA news, for example, "some legislators assailed the previous procurement of Search and Rescue Vessels from Australia for the Coast Guard as some examples of "illegitimate debts" being paid by the Filipino people."

Furthermore, "the Search and Rescue Vessels were reportedly bought by DOTC without the necessary appropriation from Congress. In 2005, then Senator Franklin Drilon said the project was not appropriated in the 2002 and 2004 budgets but funds were released for it through unprogrammed funds as well as realigned funds from other DOTC projects. It was also reported that the Australian firm that supplied the six search and rescue vessels over reports that the said vessels were of poor quality."

There is no doubt that the coast guard needs more vessels, but, comeon, I thought President Arroyo recently announced that priority must be given to buying from Filipino suppliers first., Secondly, taxpayers money when paid to Filipino suppliers/shipbuilders will circulate back into the Filipino economy boosting jobs and local taxes and secondary suppliers. The bottomline is that, these follow-on SAR Vessel project must be submitted to a competitive bidding to include Filipino shipbuilders just to settle once and for all if it is really cost effective to buy from that australian shipbuilder with or without that aussie-subsidized loan. Cost-effectiveness does not only include apparent project cost but other factors such as local job creation, local taxes paid, benefit to the local shipbuilder and secondary suppliers, technological transfer, national pride, and real costs.

For example, lets say the project is 2 billion pesos and lets say the australians out of the goodness of their heart will pay for 1 billion of the 2 billion pesos so we now say, wow, this is a winner for the Filipino people because we saved 1 billion. Well , think about it, we are paying the other 1 billion which goes into the aussie's pockets. If that 1 biillion was instead spent on locally-built ships that 1 billion remains in the Philippines, and remember, the 2 billion cost is the australian estimate. Who knows if the aussies inflated the project cost and then pretend to be good samaritans and say they will pay for 1 billion of the 2 billion(as an example). And even then, the ausssie subsidy is most likely just a low-interest loan which means the DOTC debt will increase further. Additionally, the 2 billion total project cost may be much less if the ships are built in the Philippines due to our cheaper labor. Remember, foreign shipbuilders have relocated to the Philippines precisely to save on costs.

Lastly, if the DOTC/coast guard were to incur more debts buying more vessels, they might as well owe the debt to a Filipino bank or financial institution such as the NMLC or DBP rather than to an australian bank, this way, the Filipino banking sector will be the one to benefit.

President Arroyo's 2009 budget message can be downloaded here:
http://newsbreak.com.ph/index.php?option=c...fileinfo&id=265
Let us be vigilant !

I know of several active duty and retired Philippine navy officers who have already condemned in private the plan to buy the 10 SAR vessels from Australia and they hoped it does not happen to the Philippine navy.

why?

yout friends don't like vessels made in Australia?

please read the first post above.

ok sir, got it :ssalute:

The small unit riverine craft (SURC) is rigid-hull, armed and armored patrol boat used by the US Marines and US Navy to maintain control of rivers and inland waterways.

SAR

According to the Navy, “The primary mission of the SURC is to provide tactical mobility and a limited weapons platform for the ground combat element of a Marine Air Ground Task Force in littoral and riverine environments.”[1] The boat’s secondary mission includes “command and control, reconnaissance, logistic/resupply, medevac, counter-drug operations, humanitarian assistance, peacekeeping, and noncombatant evacuation operations.”[1]

The boat is transportable by C-130 aircraft and can be launched from its trailer at lakeside.

The boats were first deployed to Iraq and are currently in use there by the US Navy and US Marine Corps. The United States Navy Riverine Squadrons, units of the Navy Expeditionary Combat Command (NECC) are using the boats to patrol strategic areas of Iraq.

The boats are built by Raytheon Naval & Maritime Integrated Systems, with a contract to build up to 100 boats. Raytheon’s contract partners are Safe Boats International of Port Orchard, Washington and Boat Master of Fort Myers, Florida.