Chamber and committees

Councillor Robertson, Russell McCutcheon just brought up the point about infrastructure at ports. The committee has heard thoughts on the current ownership and operation of our ports and harbours. Do you have a view on who is best placed to own and operate the ports and harbours that are used by CalMac, especially given the thoughts in your submission around designing ferries to be compatible with harbours?

I am grateful for that answer. I might come back to you in a moment on exactly that point.

Kirsty, we have heard Angus Duncan Campbell talk about weather resilience, and I note your comments at the beginning of this evidence session about the challenges that you would have faced had you attended in person today. The committee has heard suggestions that CalMac is becoming more reluctant to sail in adverse weather. Do you think that that is happening? In any event, does CalMac listen to representations from the community board about sailing in adverse conditions?

I am grateful.

Before I hand back to the convener, I have a final question for Angus Duncan Campbell. Angus, as you rightly brought this up, do you have anything to say on the weather resilience piece and whether CalMac is becoming more risk averse, particularly having heard the useful answer that Kirsty MacFarlane has just given?

Roy, I will cut you off there. It is very interesting, but there will be questions on staff later that my colleagues will pick up with you.

I have a final question, which is for Dr Baird. The 2012 ferries plan is due to be replaced by the islands connectivity plan, and ferries will be part of that. However, there is a separate draft long-term plan for vessels and ports, which has been given to key stakeholders for consultation. Do you have a view on whether it is optimal to consult on the two documents separately, and should it be done with only key stakeholders having access to one at this stage? Should the documents be separate at all?

I want to take up the second part of that answer with Roy Pedersen. Neil Kay talked about what might be a better model. Roy, in your opening remarks, you pointed out that CalMac was set up to be self-financing but suggested that, as it is being operated, it clearly is not. You suggested that there are other models that we might consider. What are the models that would be better for those services?

Good morning, panel. I would like to take on the question that you have just been asked while picking up on something that several witnesses have mentioned to do with service design and provision. You may have heard earlier that services could be designed differently. Perhaps the vessels or the harbours could have a different specification. Does the community board have any input to decisions on those things? If so, are its suggestions being taken on?

Good morning, panel. I would like to go back to something that Neil Kay said in his introductory remarks. The current set-up has CalMac Ferries and Serco operating services, but the vessels are owned by CMAL, and various ports and harbours are also under that organisation. Is that the best model for running services and, if not, why not?

That is all very helpful.

Angus Duncan Campbell, you made some comments earlier on exactly that point. Is your community telling CMAL what vessels and services are needed? If so, are CMAL and CalMac listening and responding?

On that point, you made some interesting comments earlier about procurement involving—or not involving—catamarans, for example. Is it your understanding that the consultations are picking up that procurement issue, with a view to analysing whether the problems that you suggest exist and, if they exist, what to do about them, or are those consultations not the best way to do that?

With deep respect, Dr Baird, I think that we will have to get on. We need to stick to the point.