Chamber and committees

My questions are partly about digging in and just trying to get some backdrop as we make the decision, so that is useful. Thank you.

I am not sure who the best person is to answer questions about the LNG installations. The update that you sent us at the beginning of February said:

“Supply of the final parts of the piping systems should have taken place in the last quarter of 2023, but was delayed”.

When did you first become aware of the issue? What action was taken to prevent it from delaying the project?

I have a couple of questions that have been sparked by Graham Simpson’s questions. We have focused on the 801 and 802 ferries, but the responses to some of Graham Simpson’s questions have prompted some other questions about additional opportunities for construction at the yard.

You mentioned wind farm support vessels. Importing and moving wind farm products around the country and our seas for onshore and offshore developments is a huge part of Scotland’s economy. The other thing that prompted a thought was about the repair and maintenance of existing ferries, which has not been mentioned. It is not just about building new ferries. It is about having ferries that run on time and are safe, and that can be innovated or upgraded. There are therefore two other potential opportunities in the market through CMAL and the wind farm and renewables industry. Could you comment on whether they will be opportunities for the yard in future?

We have had a lot of discussion about additional infrastructure. To what extent would additional infrastructure to upgrade the yard provide opportunities for a new market for the yard going forward?

Okay. I just thought I would ask. Thank you.

Thanks very much—that is helpful.

I thank the clerks for the papers that they have sent us, which are useful in taking us through the proposals. I say at the outset that I do not have any objections, but I have one or two questions about the extent to which stakeholders can be consulted. The notification states that the instrument is

“not expected to have any significant impact on stakeholders”.

It is good to see the Scottish and UK Governments agreeing. The instruments that are to be revoked are seen as entirely obsolete.

However, I would like more feedback about what monitoring will be done. Some of the statutory instruments that are to be revoked are more than 20 years old, but others are a lot more recent. How will the situation be monitored? The benefit will clearly be a reduced need for animal testing, but I would like more monitoring of the impact of the statutory instrument. It is quite unusual, in terms of parliamentary accountability, to not have feedback from stakeholders, so there is a gap. I understand the logistics and that we need to get the measure through, because otherwise Scotland will miss out.

Those are my comments, having read the background papers.

Sorry, my question was not about domestic fuel bills. I was asking about the plants.

Okay, thanks. What proportion of our total Scottish consumption will the measure impact on?

I just want to get a sense of how it all fits in.

That is really useful. It sounds as if detailed knowledge and experience—from inception right through to delivery—are required and we do not really have that in the UK or in Scotland. Did you discuss with CMAL or Transport Scotland delivering the 801 without LNG capacity? If you managed to have that conversation, what was their response? Quite a big delay has been built into the whole project.