Met Office Consultation Submission

In response to the consultation over possible changes in the organisation and structure of the Met Office, I am writing to express my opposition to the Met Office Board's support of full centralisation of forecasting production at its headquarters in Exeter with partial automation of forecast production for commercial services (Option 1). I support the creation of at least three centres of excellence (Aberdeen, London and Manchester plus the Ops Centre at Exeter) (Option 3).

The Aberdeen Civil Centre is located within my constituency and I have received many representations from constituents opposed to the closure of this office. The proposal to close the Aberdeen Civil Centre has caused widespread consternation and dismay not only to my constituents and people living in the North East however, but to the wider Scottish population. I further note that MPs of all political persuasions have joined in cross-party opposition to the closure of the regional Met Office Civil Centres.

Finally, before I set out my arguments against the closure of the regional offices, I would like to express my concern about the behaviour of Met Office management in handling this affair.

Earlier this year, Met Office staff were informed by internal email that management had made the decision to close the six remaining Met Office Civil Centres. Management had reached this decision without consulting staff, elected representatives or the general public. As the BIAC minutes for the meetings held on 25th May 2005 and 7th June 2005 released under the Freedom of Information Act show, the current consultation appears to have been initiated because of growing public and parliamentary awareness of what management proposed to do, and not the result of a genuine attempt to engage relevant parties in the future structure of the Met Office.

I was disappointed that the Ministry of Defence refused to release the Business Case for the closure of the regional Met Offices on which management's decision was apparently based. I am also very concerned by reports that management is proactively meeting with Met Office clients to persuade them of the case for full centralisation during the consultation period, wholly undermining the transparency and fairness of the consultation process.

I am reassured by the Minister with responsibility for the Met Office that the final decision on the future structure of the Met Office network rests solely with him. I trust that the four options outlined in the consultation will be given due consideration on the basis of the submissions received.

I believe you would find it useful to visit the Aberdeen Civil Centre and - as I have done - discuss the consultation proposals with the staff before making your final decision. There will be a meeting at Aberdeen City Council to discuss the future of the Aberdeen Civil Centre on Monday 17th October at 10.30am which the organisers have asked me to invite you to attend. Please contact my office if you would like further details.

I appreciate the late notice given. I do hope however that, considering what is at stake, you have visited, or will consider visiting, one of the regional civil centres before making your final decision.

Yours sincerely,

Malcolm Bruce MP

Option 1: Full Centralisation and Partial Automation

I oppose the centralisation of Met Office services and the partial automation of forecast production. While I appreciate the need to reduce duplication and to improve efficiency in the Met Office network, I consider the disadvantages of the proposal to close all six regional Civil Centres outweigh the savings likely to be accrued by choosing Option 1 (and indeed doubt those savings are likely to be realised).

The closure of the regional Civil Centres will not only detrimentally affect the Met Office in the eyes of its customers but also significantly impact upon the reputation of the Met Office as a national institution. With specific regard to the Aberdeen Civil Centre, Option 1 will remove Scotland's only operational forecasting Civil Centre and a world class Marine Forecasting Centre.

The proposal put forward by the Board appears to be a desperate, short-termist stab at making immediate monetary savings by Met Office management. The most probable result of their badly-thought out proposal will, in fact, be the loss of Met Office revenue and an exacerbation of cashflow problems in the long-term.

Option 1: Monetary savings

Full centralisation will, in my opinion, lead to a loss of private sector business for the Met Office. Far from boosting the profit-making potential of the Met Office, the net result of the strategy favoured by the Board (Option 1) will be to increase Met Office losses.

The savings cited in Option 1 are dependent on the commercial success of the Met Office during the 10 year period discussed. Should the Met Office's private customers take their business elsewhere the calculations are undermined.

In the Aberdeen area alone there are three large, commercial meteorological companies offering similar services to the Met Office Civil Centre based there (which, incidentally, shows the size and value of Aberdeen's industries and their potential for growth). Should the Aberdeen Met Office close, these companies will undoubtedly take a predatory approach towards its customers. These customers are highly likely to consider the merits of transferring to locally-based alternatives than retaining their contract with a now remote Met Office based in Exeter.

Short-term savings may be made by closing the regional Civil Centres but I question the amount the Met Office has projected will be realised by the reform, and argue such a step will cause irreparable damage to the vital commercial side of Met Office operations which will supersede short term financial gains.

In my opinion Option 1 runs counter to the Met Office's stated intent to continue making commercial business a key element of the Trading Fund remit.

Option 1: Exeter HQ Technology and Infrastructure

I am concerned that Met Office management has not devoted enough time to proving the merit of supercomputer technology and the surrounding infrastructure before they embark on the far-reaching proposal of closing the regional Civil Centres.

For a public agency with an international reputation for accuracy and reliability, it is reasonable to expect firm evidence of consistent benchmarking of this technology against direct business benefits before the established regional centres are closed.

I am also concerned about the risks involved in centring Met Office functions in a single facility. While there are two separate computers, I understand they share the same cabling tunnel. Should full centralisation go ahead, any kind of failure at Exeter would have potentially disastrous consequences, be it the result of an internal failure or a more wide-ranging black-out.

The presence of regional centres which have the capability to act as back-up should there be a technology failure at Exeter seems a highly sensible precaution, particularly given the current threat of deliberate disruption.

I appreciate that there is a responsibility on the Met Office as a Trading Fund to exploit scientific and technological advances. Instead of the Met Office framing its forward strategy to use advancing technology to meet and cater for customer expectations, it appears bent on extracting maximum use of supercomputer technology by forcing the customer to adapt their needs to full centralisation.

The Forecast Production Programme represents a significant part of the Met Office's cost base. There are risks involved in implementing full centralisation of production capability: radical centralisation could be expensive to implement over a short period and there will inevitably be adverse customer reaction.

Option 1: Staffing Proposals for the Aberdeen Area

I disagree with the Board's suggested staffing arrangements as laid out in Option 1.

Two Marine consultants are planned for the Aberdeen area to deliver services to the offshore oil and gas industry. At present, the only non-direct forecasting task for a consultant in Aberdeen is the oil company briefings. This is done by an experienced marine forecaster who then returns to the Centre to continue providing forecasts to the marine industry. The briefings currently take approximately two hours out of a twelve hour shift.

In addition to the consultant, one forecaster has been allocated for offshore detachments under the plans laid out in Option 1. The offshore detachments are currently serviced by a team of six highly skilled and experienced marine forecasters. The bulk of these forecasters, when not offshore, provide operational forecasts from the Marine Centre in Aberdeen. Option 1 does not make it clear how one forecaster is meant to achieve all this.

It is difficult to see the logic or what efficiency savings can flow from this proposed structure.

These badly thought-out staffing structures exemplify management's short-sighted approach to the proposals currently being considered by Government, and give significant cause for concern.

Option 3: The Creation of Regional Centres of Excellence

I strongly support the option of creating centres of excellence in at least Aberdeen, London and Manchester (Option 3).

This small reduction in savings has been cited by Met Office management as a reason for preferring Option 1 over Option 3.

I would urge a great deal of caution before basing such a serious decision as that of closing the regional Met Offices on the savings laid out in Option 1. Full centralisation presents a serious threat to the Met Office's current private sector generated revenue. I believe this revenue will be significantly reduced if centralisation goes ahead and therefore question the projected savings.

Indeed, this forward strategy will enable the Met Office to more fully deliver quality services and products to meet the needs of its business customers. While Option 1 will detract commercial value from the Met Office and potentially compound its losses, this strategy adds commercial value to the Met Office while providing guaranteed savings.

In the document, 'Met Office Proposal for Changes to its Civil Centre Network', published June 2005, management argues that, as the closure of eight civil centres since 1990 resulted in no long term impact on Met Office services and only a small loss of revenue, it can be concluded that the closure of the rest of the regional centres will similarly have little impact on the Met Office.

This argument is simplistic and naive. The closure of, for example, the Glasgow Civil Centre would naturally be mitigated by the continued existence of the Aberdeen Civil Centre and the transfer of many of the former centre's staff there. Parallels should not be drawn from the experience of the most recent round of closures. The effect of the closure of the sole remaining Civil Centre in Scotland will have a much more profound effect than the previous rationalisation of the Met Office's presence there.

I believe the issue of the commercial impact of centralisation must be considered more fully when direct comparisons of the monetary savings realised from Option 1 and Option 3 are made.

The Met Office, as a Trading Fund, has an obligation to maximise the profit it makes from its commercial work with the private sector. As Don Touhig himself has pointed out, the aim is to return shareholder value to the taxpayer.

The Need for Regional Met Office Presence

I am aware that the Ministry of Defence intends to retain Met Office operations on its bases in Scotland. The Minister with responsibility for the Met Office, Don Touhig, argued this was because military pilots require 'direct, immediate and face-to-face briefings' on the potential impact of the weather on military operations and that this justifies the maintenance of military aviation centres in Scotland.

The loss of regional Met Office Civil Centres will end the Met Office's capability to provide direct, immediate and face-to-face briefings in the civil realm. I am at a loss to understand why, when the potential impact of the weather on military operations merit the on-the-ground presence of Met Office staff, the impact of severe weather on public safety or the interests of highly-valued Met Office customers do not.

Only last year the outgoing Chief Executive, Dr David Rogers said:

"I want the Met Office to work with Government to help mitigate the impacts of severe weather. This goal can only be achieved if we maintain a significant regional presence and my wish to focus on services which improve public safety."

If we are to accept the Met Office Board's assertion that advances in telecommunications removes the need for Met Office staff to be based in the regions, why is it that such advances are deemed inadequate for military use? Again, those customers which base multi-million pound contracts on the ease with which they can access Met Office information at regional Met Offices will question whether they will receive equal service from Exeter when the military have clearly concluded they will not.

The Met Office appears to be creating two-tier service provision: immediate, face-to-face services for the military and a remote service for public agencies such as mountain rescue, the coastguard and the police. These agencies, the staff of which routinely put their lives at risk to help the public, require as immediate, as detailed and as accurate weather information as the military.

I note that Met Office management intend to improve communications with the regional defence network to ensure regional knowledge is maintained. While the defence network will provide some recompense for the loss of the Civil network, I am aware that the defence network - while not at immediate risk - will be subject to an ongoing, high level review into how best to meet Defence requirements in the future. Indeed, in the 'Met Office Proposal for Changes to its Civil Centre Network', management point out that proposals other than the 4 options listed in the current consultation which considered such solutions as co-locating military and civil offices were rejected on the basis of the 'long term viability of defence sites'.

Clearly, it is necessary to have Met Office staff based in the regions of the United Kingdom. It appears counterproductive and short-sighted to close the regional Civil offices only to then set about the task of establishing improved communication with regional defence stations, the future of which are not guaranteed.

Employee Regional Expertise

It is my view that one of the Met Office's greatest assets is its network of highly-trained staff with local knowledge of particular regions' environs and weather patterns.

Its network of regional Civil Centres allows for the commercial dissemination of data provided by the supercomputers based in Exeter. While the technology has evolved to an extent which makes the human role less prominent in forecasting, this in no way undermines the role of Met Office staff in interpreting that data and communicating it to customers in a way which has commercial or public application.

As the role of Met Office staff becomes more focused on providing a service to customers it has become more not less important to have on-the-spot staff who are able to translate weather forecasts into useful and practical information for clients on a local basis.

Finally, the proposal to separate more clearly forecast production and service provision is considered illogical by Met Office staff I have spoken with. At Aberdeen Civil Centre for example, the synergy between production and service provision is considered one of the cornerstones of their commercial success.

An Aberdeen Centre of Excellence: Servicing industry

The Aberdeen Civil Centre is the sole Met Office centre dealing with public and commercial customers and with BBC Scotland.

The previous reforms to the production process in 2003 led to the creation of regional civil centres which specialised in particular fields. The Met Office cited the benefits of this step specifically for the Aberdeen Civil Centre thus:

(Source: Prospect briefing)

It is hard to believe that advances in supercomputer technology and telecommunications have advanced so much in the 2 years since the Met Office reached these conclusions to now merit the extreme measure of closing these Centres.

As Aberdeen developed into the European oil and gas capital, Aberdeen Met Office developed into a world class centre of excellence for marine forecasting. The Centre built up a well deserved reputation for constant innovation, a high level of service and customer-facing expertise. Staff there have received Innovation Awards and the Chief Executive's Award for Excellence in recognition of the quality of work produced and the flexible customer service offered.

It is my firm belief that the Met Office would gain far more by expanding this scientific and technical community and building on its widely-recognised expertise than by dismantling it.

The Aberdeen Civil Centre is ideally placed to maintain and extend the key business relationships which the Met Office so desperately needs. It is located within a Scottish Enterprise Grampian showcase site. Current customers can easily access account managers and the operational forecasting team on a face-to-face basis. They can also view Met Office production capabilities. As the Met Office itself notes, in Aberdeen customers and Met Office account managers, metocean consultants and production team work in 'harmony'.

Industries which predominate in Aberdeen such as the oil and gas industry, the fishing industry, ferries, ports and harbours, and the construction industry are all represented in the Aberdeen Civil Centre's list of customers and rely upon the centre for the local data it produces. While the majority of its clients are locally-based, or based on the coast of the UK, a number are from across the globe. Clearly the Aberdeen Met Office is chosen by customers not only because of its proximity to them, but by companies from across the world because of its particular skills and expertise and because of its understanding of industry requirements.

The marine market on the whole is exceptionally dynamic. The team in Aberdeen have kept pace with the required knowledge and skills through their close contact with this fast-moving market. The Aberdeen team provide services and products which are tailored to the customers needs because they have established a two-way dialogue with their customers. It remains responsive to the needs and expectations of industry.

This month, a record 152 oil and gas production licences were on offer and heralded the entry of 24 new firms to the North Sea. I note that the Department of Trade and Industry pointed out that the results indicate a vote of confidence in the future of oil and gas exploration in the UK. Exploration activity rose with 63 wells in 2004, and may exceed 70 wells this year.

All this points to a dynamic, rapidly developing industry. To remove a Met Office with proven commercial focus and forecasting expertise which is in the ideal position to capitalise further on this valuable industry makes very little sense in terms of marketing the Met Office.

On receiving data from the Exeter headquarters, regionally-based staff often use their local knowledge to complement the information. As the Met Office itself states, it is the skilled interpretation and use of Met Office numerical models of both atmosphere and ocean which draw customers to the Aberdeen Civil Centre. The Marine Production Unit monitors, modifies and processes the data from Exeter's supercomputers to ensure the most appropriate information is made available for the customer. The data which is received from Exeter is effectively 'fine tuned' by the Aberdeen staff before being converted into products for dissemination.

The Aberdeen Centre is also ideally placed to service the rapidly expanding renewable energy sector which relies heavily on accurate weather forecasting. The remote areas of Northern Scotland are most likely to see the greatest concentration of future renewable energy plant in the UK.

Public Safety

The impact of the weather on public safety, while not specific to Scotland, is often more severe given the extremes of weather which Scotland often experiences. Public agencies such as the police, air traffic control, coastguards, mountain rescue and the road agencies all rely upon accurate and timely weather information. The Aberdeen Civil Centre makes a tremendous contribution to the prevention of unnecessary loss of life due to extreme weather and in saving those lives caught up in it. Their experience of the nuances of the Scottish climate and its geography play a significant role in public safety.

The Political Impact

I would question whether the Met Office Board has considered the political ramifications of removing the sole remaining weather station from Scotland (and indeed from Wales and Northern Ireland). Scotland has a far greater degree of political autonomy that ever before. Industry and other elements of the Scottish economy have adapted and benefited from this. To remove direct access to a Scottish based Met Office Civil Centre insults the needs of the Scottish Executive, its agencies and the Scottish economy on the whole. This is particularly true following the considerable progress that has been made in strengthening the relationship between the Met Office and the Scottish Executive and in providing the latter with innovative, tailored services.

Retaining a regional network enforces the public perception of the national Met Office as an institution which is sensitive and responsive to regional business needs and political nuance.

A residual, largely administrative facility in Edinburgh is no compensation for the loss of the sole Scottish forecasting facility. The attempt to present existing Edinburgh facilities as proof that Scotland retains a significant Met Office capability in Scotland is far from convincing.

Aberdeen Met Office Staff

The Met Office currently benefits from a highly skilled, loyal staff employed at the Aberdeen Civil Centre (many of whom went to the considerable trouble of relocating there when the Glasgow Centre was closed).

I do not share the Met Office Board's optimism in relation to the number of staff who will be prepared to relocate to Exeter should the Aberdeen Civil Centre be closed. I think a number will want to remain in Scotland and - with I believe sincere regret - choose to go to work for the Met Office's competitors.

The highly specialised knowledge developed over many years studying Scottish weather which the Met Office has expensively and carefully nurtured in its staff could be lost. Worse still it will be lost to competitors. It is difficult to see how this can be rebuilt and replicated in Exeter, especially during the short 2-year period given over to the transition.

Similarly, I do not believe a 'diverse and nationwide' recruitment policy will ensure Exeter is staffed by employees with local knowledge. Scottish expertise will be lost, with subsequent impacts on public safety and commercial success, not least because of the catchment area for future Met Office staff.

Conclusion

The Met Office has a responsibility to look towards the long-term effect of their decisions in relation to the regional network. Dismantling this network could lead to short term savings (although I dispute the savings suggested in Option 1 will be realised) but it is a policy which is much more likely to damage the long-term prospects of the agency by undermining the key business relationships it has forged and the commercial base from which it will operate.

Commercial issues have not been highlighted as part of this consultation but in truth are fundamental to the future direction and success of the Met Office.

I urge the Minister to consider whether the proposed closure of the regional offices is not in fact a knee-jerk reaction to immediate cash-flow difficulties. No apparent consideration has been given to the effect of full centralisation on the Met Office's commercial strengths nor on its employees. The remaining Met Office structure proposed by management shows a dangerous misunderstanding of the role and functions of the regional civil centres. It is a short-term plan with long-term risks.

Full centralisation is a radical step from which it will be extremely difficult to return from. I urge the Government to choose Option 3.