Regular assessment of assets and resources
Cranston Inquiry · The Cranston Inquiry Report · Issued 5 February 2026 · Addressed to: HM Coastguard
Source — verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation
There should be regular assessments by HM Coastguard of the adequacy of the available assets and human resources to respond to both current and reasonably foreseeable levels of small boat activity. Where the forecast level of resourcing need cannot be delivered within budget, the position must be escalated rapidly to the Department for Transport.
Cranston Inquiry, The Cranston Inquiry Report · 5 Feb 2026 Source PDF →
Published evidence summary
Publicly available evidence relating to this recommendation:
Sources
How was this evidence gathered?
Response — verbatim from government
●HM Coastguard
HMCG recognises the importance of regular assessments and has the following operational measures in place for the review of assets: • SAR asset availability (surface vessels and aircraft) is assessed daily, and every watch assesses asset allocation at the start of and throughout their watch. Should availability of assets change (e.g. due to technical defect), contingency measures will be implemented as required. • The network resource (Dover, JRCC, and Humber) is used to support unpredicted small boat crossings. This allows incidents to be coordinated from specific sites that have experience with small boat crossings rather than flexing through using any location in the network, ensuring critical resilience. The measures outlined in response to Recommendation 1 support situational awareness if the JRCC or Humber MRCC is coordinating incidents. • Network Commanders dynamically allocate staffing resources across the network to ensure the best possible response to incidents, especially during high-demand or complex situations. • Biannual MCA reviews of overall adequacy of resourcing to meet projected demand. The MCA formally presents all key risks for discussion to the DfT’s MCA sponsorship board (chaired by the responsible Director General) on a quarterly basis. MCA also shares its monthly Executive risk report, enabling discussion and escalation of MCA risks up through DfT’s risk management structures as required to ensure sufficient sight within the Department. MCA is also able to communicate emerging or worsening risks as needed directly at any point in the quarterly cycle. There is regular engagement between the responsible DfT Director General and the MCA CEO, as well as the responsible DfT Director and MCA CEO and Chair. There is also frequent engagement between the DfT sponsorship team and MCA officials (both MCA’s central governance team and other operational leads). When risks or issues are identified where joint action or DfT support is required, MCA and DfT officials work closely at all levels to identify and implement solutions.
HM Coastguard · 16 Jul 2026 Written response →
Evidence trail — what's actually happened since
No published activity has been recorded against this recommendation yet.
Each entry above links to a primary source — gov.uk written statement, consultation response document, or inspection report. The Index does not characterise government intent; it tracks what has been published.
How this page is built
Source and Response are verbatim from primary documents. The Evidence trail records published activity since — written statements, consultation outcomes, inspection findings, parliamentary references. The Index does not paraphrase or characterise intent; it tracks what has been published. Where the evidence is the absence of action (a missed deadline, a slipped timetable), that absence is documented from primary sources rather than inferred.
This recommendation's data is verified periodically against primary sources. The Index is monitored for staleness weekly.