Official Report: search what was said in Parliament
The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Filter your results Hide all filters
Displaying 2562 contributions
|
Public Audit Committee
Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”
Meeting date: 8 September 2022
Richard Leonard
Keith Brown was asked to approve it, though, was he not?
Public Audit Committee
Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”
Meeting date: 8 September 2022
Richard Leonard
Can I pick up on that? You have already told us that you were a “proactive minister”, so I do not think that it is satisfactory to rely on a civil service draft as a reason for that letter going out, which said that the builders refund guarantee was a preference—it said that although the CMAL board had
“a preference for refund guarantees it has on occasion taken alternative approaches”.—[Official Report, 17 May 2022; c 11.]
Jim McColl told us:
“That gave us the green light to go ahead and put the resources in to put in the tender. There is a lot of work that goes into tenders and we were not going to go ahead and do all of that if we were not going to be allowed to negotiate a different form of guarantee.”—[Official Report, Public Audit Committee, 16 June 2022; c 5.]
How appropriate do you think it is, in the middle of a tender process, for you, as the minister, to send that kind of letter?
Public Audit Committee
Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”
Meeting date: 8 September 2022
Richard Leonard
As you know, it has taken a different view in the evidence that it has submitted to us.
I want to ask a final question before I bring in Willie Coffey. Going back to the letter of comfort and the voted loan, I think that the loan’s value was £106 million, and the value of the tender was £96 million or £97 million. Who was party to decisions about the issuing of the letter of comfort and agreeing to a voted loan of that scale?
Public Audit Committee
Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”
Meeting date: 8 September 2022
Richard Leonard
So you are saying that the transfer of risk from FMEL to CMAL and then to the Scottish Government would have been taken by officials, with no political sign-off.
Public Audit Committee
Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”
Meeting date: 8 September 2022
Richard Leonard
Okay. We might investigate that matter a bit more deeply.
I turn to Willie Coffey.
Public Audit Committee
Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”
Meeting date: 8 September 2022
Richard Leonard
Colin Beattie has some questions.
Public Audit Committee
Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”
Meeting date: 8 September 2022
Richard Leonard
Will you briefly touch on nationalisation, Colin? I will then bring in Graham Simpson.
Public Audit Committee
Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”
Meeting date: 8 September 2022
Richard Leonard
In the minutes that are remaining, I want to bring in Craig Hoy briefly, and then I will ask Graham Simpson whether he has a question to put to Mr Mackay.
Public Audit Committee
Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”
Meeting date: 8 September 2022
Richard Leonard
Craig Hoy has some questions to put to you.
Public Audit Committee
Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”
Meeting date: 8 September 2022
Richard Leonard
You have talked about other evidence that we have received, which you think revises the history book a little bit. In your submission to the committee you said that you were
“first aware of the guarantees issue following the selection of preferred bidder”.
However, the correspondence from February 2015 suggests that you were aware of that issue much earlier.
