Seòmar agus comataidhean

Can you tell us a bit about the nature of that meeting? What did you ask the First Minister to do and what did she undertake to do?

Okay. The First Minister says that, all the way through, the major consideration for awarding the contract to FMEL, particularly when it hit troubled times, was the preservation of jobs. Can you say, hand on heart, to this committee that, if the contract had not been awarded to FMEL, there would still be jobs and a thriving yard there?

And the Government said what?

I come back to the flagrant disregard for the public purse. Do you think that the Government had taken the decision to nationalise and was not intent on proceeding with any proposal, even though it was in the better interests of the taxpayer? Was nationalisation the only objective at that point?

It could be implied that politics were also at play in the nationalisation of the yard. At any point, did you suggest anything different that might have meant that the amount of money and the risk that taxpayers have now been exposed to could somehow have been shared? At any point, did you say, “Maybe there is wrong on both sides here. Let us sit down and arbitrate for a different solution here”?

Okay, thank you. You met with the First Minister at Bute house where you say you raised a red flag about the project. Was that another one of the meetings where the officials were asked to leave the room?

But it is still taxpayers’ money. The vessels are currently five and a half years late and at least £250 million over budget. Where might this end up?

Yes or no. Is there still the possibility that you could pull the plug on the two vessels?

You still reserve the right to recommend to ministers that they pull the plug, then.

Various conversations took place throughout the process, but we start from the premise that the project was bungled at the point of procurement, bungled at the point when the refund guarantee came into question, bungled at the design phase, and bungled at the point at which requests were made for some degree of arbitration between the parties.

In the submission from FMEL’s management, Mr McColl states that, in February 2017, the shipyard

“informed Scottish ministers that it was highly probable that the vessels would be late.”

It is clear that alarm bells were being rung at that point.

The submission from Mr McColl and his colleagues goes on to say:

“Our chairman met with the First Minister on the 31st of May 2017 at Bute house to request her intervention to facilitate a meaningful discussion around the very significant unplanned changes and cost increases being experienced on the two ferry contracts.”

What readout did Transport Scotland or the Scottish Government get from that meeting? Who else would have been present?