1

E- borders analysis

Student Name

Institutional Affiliation

Course

Instructor

Date
 2

A breach of contract occurs when one party breaks the rules and regulations that the two

parties agreed before (Kull,2020).  The breach of contract takes place due to the failure of one

party to perform its obligations under the contract or the behavior of one party depicts an

intention of not performing its obligations under the contract. It can also occur as a result of

defaulting of act of one’s party. The home office was ordered to pay £224m to a major US

corporation due to the failure of delivering security to the borders programme and £50m was to

be paid by the ministers. The e-borders programme was meant to reform the border controls and

it was launched in 2003 by labour.

Raytheon won a nine-year contract in the 2007 for the e-borders programme. The

contract was terminated by the coalition government together with the US defense corporation

because e-borders programme was failing. The government said that it had lost confidence in

Raytheon after he failed to deliver the E-borders programme in good time. Raytheon failed to

deliver the e-borders programme a year behind the schedule.

Raytheon threaten the ministers that he will sue them for £500m before they enter into a

binding agreement with the blame falling onto the UK Border agency for the failures

(Hardy,2018). The arbitration tribunal criticized UKBA officials for their failures in giving out

full information to the home secretary on whether the company had an arguable case to hold on

to the deal. Therefore, the no judgement was passed to the Raytheon for his failures to meet its

contractual obligations.

The arbitration tribunal gave instructed some payments to be made to Raytheon though

the full ruling was not yet made in public. £50m was for the damages due to the termination of

the contract. £126m was for the assets delivered by the company before being sacked I.e., the IT

systems. £10m was meant to settle the complaints related to the changed to the original contract
 3

and £38m was used for the interest payments. Since one party failed to meet its obligations of

offering security to the E-borders programme, the court of UK was right when it ordered the

home office to pay to Raytheon after the breach of the contract after the termination of the

company’s contract by the Theresa May (British home secretary) to build the immigration

computer system.

The government agencies involved with the development of this system did not

implement the lessons learned from the e-Borders' failures (Mastroe,2016). Firstly, there has

been insufficiency of the Key staff over the 12 years which made the programme to rely on the

contractors. Secondly, failure of the department to find the timely solutions to certain strategic

concerns raised by the external and the internal reviews. A serious concern was still raised by the

major project Authority in 2015. the concerns were about the flagging weaknesses around the

capabilities and governance and the deliverability of the E borders programme.

Thirdly is the ill-conceived decision by the leaders. The commercial strategy of the e-

borders was meant to transfer the risks to the supplier where the department considered to have a

consistent approach of the government ICT programnmes at the moment. However, Raytheon

proved ill on the management of the risks. The Raytheon’s proposal was incorporated within the

contract by the department. However, the proposal was based on the requirements that are too

high which led to existence of disputes after the award contract. The Raytheon’s solution was

often found unconvincing by the department.

The new border system is robust enough to protect the UK system from looming the

terrorist threats. Contest is the counter -terrorism strategy for UK (Powell,2016). It is meant to

enhance security and combat terrorism so that the people of the country feel free to live the

country and also gain the confidence of living in their won country. There are four strands of the
 4

contest. Firstly, is the Pursue which involves keen investigation and disruption of the attacks

from terrorist. This was made possible through implementation of the recommendations of MI5

and review of the improvement of the CT policing’s operation, Introduction of the new counter

terrorism legislation, training and the recruitment of over 1,900 staff across the intelligence and

security agencies, Maintenance of the legislative tools of the country and ensuring a strong

oversight of the counter terrorism work which should be independent.

Secondly is the Prevent which is aimed at stopping the people of the country from

becoming the terrorism or giving their support to terrorism (Macklin,2019). This was possible

was made possible through the channeling of the resources to the areas where the terrorism is

highest, Development of multi-agency pilots to trial methods who will enhance the

understanding of the people who are at the risk of engaging to terrorism. Furthermore, building

of strong partnership with the civil society and the members of the society will prevent the

terrorism.

Thirdly, is the Protect which is aimed at looking for ways in which the security of the

country can be improved to combat the terrorism. This is through analyzing the large volume of

the data to capture every detail of the unknown person, implementation of the detection

technologies at the border, restricting information sharing by the people who work in a sensitive

area such as the airport and improvement of security at the crowded places.

Lastly is the prepare which is meant in minimizing the effect of the attack by the terrorist

and also to enhance quick recovery as fast as possible. This is through the investment of

emergency facilities to enhance quick deliverance of the response in case of an attack and

carrying out test on the capabilities of the multi agencies.

 5

References

Powell, L. (2016). Counter-Productive Counter-Terrorism. How is the dysfunctional discourse of

Prevent failing to restrain radicalisation?. Journal for Deradicalization, (8), 46-99.

Mastroe, C. (2016). Evaluating CVE: Understanding the recent changes to the United Kingdom’s

implementation of Prevent. Perspectives on Terrorism, 10(2), 50-60.

Hardy, K. (2018). Comparing theories of radicalisation with countering violent extremism policy.

Macklin, G. (2019). The evolution of extreme-Right terrorism and efforts to counter it in the United

Kingdom. CTC Sentinel, 12(1), 15-20.

Kull, A. (2020). Restitution as a Remedy for Breach of Contract (pp. 293-346). Routledge.