The military SAR do a fantastic job and there will inevitably be some concerns whether the new provider can match this. My guess is they probably can. As the government statement points out, the Marine and Coastguard Agency has been using contracted choppers for years. However the proof of the pudding... We'll just have to see. I don't think we can be complacent, but the knee-jerk reaction that because it's a private company it will be a poorer service isn't justified.

From what I've read, this is not purely about cost but also the question whether SAR should continue to be a military function. It appears that it no longer supports military skills. There would also be the cost of replacing the Sea Kings - presumably any new military helicopters will be for combat operations rather than SAR.

I think the insurance question is a red herring. Military SAR is just as much a public cost as the new service will be, just paid for from a different budget, and is not in itself protection against charging. However, the UK is not the Alps, where people venturing into the high mountains are climbers and skiers who might be expected to take out insurance. Our remote areas are also close to where people live and work, and people may be there, and in need of help, for many reasons. Many 'mountain' rescues in the UK involve ordinary walkers who wouldn't consider themselves mountaineers, and road accidents and medical emergencies in remote areas. Almost anyone who doesn't spend their entire time in cities could potentially find themselves needing Mountain Rescue and a helicopter evacuation. The question in my mind is why the Air Ambulances, who do an equally fantastic job, aren't also publicly funded.