Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 30 November 2024
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2151 contributions

|

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 9 June 2022

Colin Beattie

Is that information available?

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 9 June 2022

Colin Beattie

Sorry to interrupt. At the point of nationalisation, some due diligence and assessment of the vessels must have been done. Did that include looking at what had happened to the huge amount of public money that had been put into the business?

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 9 June 2022

Colin Beattie

Okay, so—

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 9 June 2022

Colin Beattie

Did the fact that there was no formal escalation process contribute to the failure? I have said that the programme steering group did not seem to have a clear role, and when issues were raised, Transport Scotland passed them up the line to Scottish ministers on an ad hoc basis.

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 9 June 2022

Colin Beattie

In the Auditor General’s report, it says that ministers were advised on an “ad hoc” basis.

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 9 June 2022

Colin Beattie

Did they work?

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 9 June 2022

Colin Beattie

It seems that there was some conflict in the information that CMAL and FMEL were producing—one was rather more optimistic than the other. How were the issues dealt with when they were escalated up the line to the PSG, Transport Scotland and so on? What interventions were made to try to resolve what had become a contract dispute?

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 9 June 2022

Colin Beattie

Given the different claims that were being made, it is clear that dispute management or resolution—whatever we want to call it—should have been used. I think that there was an option for that in the contract, but it was never exercised. Why?

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 9 June 2022

Colin Beattie

That sounds a bit odd to me, but let us move to the interesting stuff: the money. The Scottish Government gave loan support to FMEL outside of the payments under the contract. What was the rationale for and purpose of those loans? Were any conditions of note attached to the loans? If so, were they adhered to? How was the success or otherwise of the loans assessed?

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 9 June 2022

Colin Beattie

Yet, at the point of nationalisation, there was no sign of any results from that money—not just the loans, but the staged payments. The Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee’s report “Construction and procurement of ferry vessels in Scotland” makes it clear that those staged payments seemed odd, because some were done out of sequence just in order to hit a target, but bore no relation to the progression that should have been in place for constructing those vessels. That is more than evident from their state when nationalisation took place. Given the concerns that were raised by that committee, what happened at nationalisation? You took over hugely incomplete vessels—a few million pounds of steel here and there—but £128.25 million in total has been poured into the yard, and there is nothing to show for it.