Chamber and committees

I understand. Unless Stuart Garrett has a different experience that he wants to comment on, I will stay with Robbie Drummond for a final question.

Robbie, you mentioned that the Clyde and Hebrides ferry services contract will be up in October 2024. Are you already in discussions with Transport Scotland about what will happen after that date? If so, where are those discussions?

The model in Norway is clearly very different, but we heard this morning that the Norwegian operators have a great deal of discretion over which vessels they run. Will you clarify your position in that regard given what the convener said earlier? How much flexibility and choice do you have in relation to the vessels that you run on particular routes? Do you just have to go with whatever CMAL or Transport Scotland provides for you?

I understand. Thank you.

Robbie, is that your experience?

Out of interest, how long does that process take? When you submit a request, what is the window for it to be approved?

I understand—thank you. My final question is also to Robbie Drummond. Monica Lennon asked earlier about crew. Can you tell the committee which company employs the crew? Does CalMac—your company—employ the crew, or is it another company that does so?

I understand. So that the committee fully understands, Transport Scotland contracts with your CalMac, which then subcontracts to Caledonian MacBrayne Crewing (Guernsey) Ltd for the provision of crew. If that is right, does Caledonian MacBrayne Crewing (Guernsey) Ltd have any other clients?

But you did not ask that question during the process.

Good morning. I have a couple of questions. Harald, the four main private operators in Norway own or lease their vessels to fulfil the contract obligations that we have heard about. How do those ferry operators procure their ferries, and who decides the precise specifications—the size, the crew complements and so on—that will be procured and ultimately used?

You say that the 12-month extension follows consultation with various stakeholders and that—you have just said this—you hope that it will alleviate the burden. Has it been reported back from the consultation with stakeholders that the 12-month extension is welcome, that 12 months is the right amount of time and that it will ease the burden and the cost? What is the response from the consultation?