Seòmar agus comataidhean

Should tight control of costs involve stopping any further bonuses?

After what appears to have been quite a protracted period during which the audit and risk committee and the board did not meet, they both did so in November 2021. What was the catalyst for those meetings resuming, and, in your view, are the board and the audit and risk committee now meeting regularly?

The audit body recommended that

“the college should reduce or extend the tenure of some members to provide for improved continuity of membership at the end of individuals’ tenure”

and said that that is being considered by the college. Will you provide some detail on how the college is taking that recommendation forward, and on the timescale for achievement?

At the point at which the auditor signed their opinion—in March 2022—papers for the college’s board and committee meetings that were held after June 2021 were not publicly available on the college’s website. However, by 31 July 2022—the date that the convener alluded to—the college was compliant with that aspect of the code. It therefore sounds as though things have improved. To what extent, though, did the college take prompt action on that recommendation? Do you have any concerns that it was too slow in meeting it?

That is fine. Thank you.

From this point on, a lot rests on your shoulders. You have asked the director general for economy, as the accountable officer, to ensure that both they and FMPG

“do everything possible to improve productivity, maximise operational efficiency and ensure that there is a tight control on costs”.

How do you expect that to be achieved?

What assurance can you give the committee that there will be no additional funding beyond what has been forecast by the CEO of the yard and agreed by the Scottish Government—that is, no more than £97.5 million for vessel 801 and no more than £105.1 million for vessel 802? What assurance can you provide that that will not be exceeded?

You talked about the public’s anger about the delays and the cost overruns. This situation has been going on for eight years and there have been six ministers, but there have been no ministerial resignations. If there were to be any significant increase in costs or significant delays, would you resign, given that you have issued the direction?

Good morning, Mr Gray. The assessment of value for money was detailed, but you said that it was narrow and that you had to set it against what you have described as a wider set of considerations. Can you provide to the committee or publish any detailed assessment of that wider set of considerations? You said that one of them was a conversation with Stuart McMillan, which does not sound particularly scientific.

Do you not think that, given that we are talking about the commitment of a huge amount of taxpayers’ money, ministers should undertake more than anecdotal or non-scientific assessments when they seek to override official advice?