Chamber and committees

Thank you. The final point that I would like to put to Mr McColl is that you have at times described this contract as “catastrophic” and you have called it “a fiasco”. Do you share any responsibility for that catastrophe?

You said:

“We could not understand why the Government did not take a stronger stance with CMAL. We now know why.”

What do you mean by that?

Where is your evidence for that?

Okay. I want to move us on to another area. You talked in your opening statement about why you feel that the contract has gone in the way that it has. If I take you again to the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee’s inquiry, one of the conclusions that it made was that

“... FMEL lacked the appropriate level of design capabilities ... failed to manage the design ... process effectively ... and proceeded to build the vessels before the design had been suitably developed and signed off.”

How do you respond to that conclusion?

What did he say? I am sorry. Does he deny that or accede to it?

Can I stop you there, Mr McColl? You have said, I think, in your evidence to the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee and in the written submission that you have given us that you were concerned about the relationship between the Scottish Government and CMAL.

What was the agreement?

I have read it, Mr McColl. I have read it in the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee minutes.

That appears to be at odds with the email correspondence of 8 and 9 October that has fairly recently come to light, in which serious misgivings were expressed by the board of CMAL about the awarding of the contract without a builders refund guarantee.

I am trying to understand this. Are you saying that he had just received a legal letter—