Chamber and committees

I am sorry; I could not work out where that voice was coming from.

Thank you, cabinet secretary and your officials who attended but were not put under any pressure.

I now suspend the meeting so that we can prepare for our next item.

It would also be helpful to clarify what the future policy on that will be, because this is about looking forward.

As no other committee member wants to ask a question, my question at the end is to you, minister. I have mentioned a couple of times the REC Committee report from the previous session. I have to admit that I am heavily invested in that.

I understand that, but creeping forward is not what the REC Committee recommended. What this committee is charged with doing is trying to find a way to take things forward. The final part of the paragraph that I have just quoted, as I am sure that you know—I know the report fairly well—says that there should be

“scope to streamline and simplify decision-making structures by merging or abolishing certain of them.”

That means that, without putting too fine a point on it, according to the REC Committee, CMAL should no longer exist. Would you challenge that?

Yes, Morag—of course.

That will be up to committee members, Morag.

Liam Kerr has some questions.

I have made a mistake. I should have brought the deputy convener in. I do not want to incur her wrath so I will bring her in now, and then bring in Monica Lennon.

I am just looking around. I have one further question, and if no other members have any questions, I will ask it.

Based on the evidence that you have given this morning, Kevin, I am enthusiastic about the number of ferries that are up for design and delivery. I am less confident in the price, which I think is a year old; I think that it may be significantly more.

If we are to look forward to the sustainable delivery of ferry services in Scotland, we have to look back to the history and the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee’s report, which said that we did not get the contract right. When talking about new design, the report said:

“action should ensure that future contracts achieve the most appropriate balance between cash flow and risk and include more robust safeguards”.

It goes on, but, based on that, it would give me more confidence, looking to the future, if we could understand the tender process.

I accept that you may not be able to give all this information today—we would be happy to receive it in writing—but we would like an explanation of the tender process, how you went through it and selected the yard; the sign-off of the design of the ferries; the overall cost that has been agreed at the outset for each boat; how the staged payments will be made, how many there are and who will check them; and on what dates delivery will be made and the penalties that will be in place for failing to meet those delivery dates. That seems the most important process in getting future ferries to Scotland on time, as the report highlighted, and if we are to have a sustainable ferry service, we need to be confident that it is being achieved. Are you in the position to write to the committee to clarify those points in relation to the contracts?

You are so generous, and I take that in the spirit in which I am sure that it was meant. However, we have to make sure that we have this right.