Seòmar agus comataidhean

One of the comments in the evidence from the former management of FMEL is:

“Audit Scotland did not consider vessel design or the initial tendering process, which FMEL argue is essential to understanding subsequent delays and cost increases.”

What is your response to that?

In September, FMEL confirmed that it was unable to provide a builder’s refund guarantee, which was a mandatory requirement. Did FMEL give a reason why it could not give that guarantee, and why that had not been mentioned in its bid?

Do you know who was on the evaluation panel?

So there was no documentation at all to show the communication between CMAL, Transport Scotland and the ministers, or who had actually been spoken to. Nothing at all came out when the audit was being done.

The pandemic also put additional pressures on unpaid carers, because of the closure of day centres and respite services, and that resulted in increased feelings of anxiety, depression and mental exhaustion. Have all those facilities opened up again since the pandemic? If they have not, what is the Scottish Government doing to ensure that they are opened to give people the support that they need?

Nicola Dickie might want to come in on that.

Service users and carers do not always have a say in or choice about what support works best for them. Self-directed support was designed to give people choice and control over their care, including personalised options for carers to take short breaks from caring. SDS has not yet been fully implemented. People using social care support have described the hurdles that they encounter in accessing services and support as a battle, difficult, overcomplicated and bureaucratic. The pandemic has highlighted the precarious situation of many vulnerable people who rely on social care or support, and it had a negative impact on people who require support. The Scottish Human Rights Commission has expressed deep concern about the level of social care support that is likely to be available in future to people whose packages were reduced or withdrawn during the pandemic. How is the Scottish Government involving service users and carers in reforming social care services?

Thank you.

Good morning, Mr Boyle. Your team has provided a report that, in your words, shows “a multitude of failings”. It is a comprehensive report, even with the lack of available documentary evidence, and has raised an awful lot of concerns and a lot more questions. Once again, the issue of transparency in the Scottish Government has been raised.

The report makes it clear that the project has been riddled with problems and delays over six years. The vessels are four years late and it now looks like they will be five years late. Currently, the cost is two and a half times the original budget. Worryingly, paragraph 105 states:

“The Scottish Government is committed to paying the additional vessel costs, regardless of the final price.”

All of that is at taxpayers’ expense and, seemingly, with no accountability from ministers.

Paragraph 141 states:

“Because engines and equipment were purchased several years in advance, warranties have expired, and any repairs required before vessel 801 enters service could be expensive and time-consuming.”

We now know that there will be delays due to cabling being too short for the vessels and, to add another layer to the saga, once the vessels eventually come into service, there is now talk that they are 40m too long for the harbours that they will serve and that the masters of the boats who have been practising using simulators have been unable to dock them safely.

It seems that the story will continue, the costs will continue to rise and there might well be further delays. That is before we start talking about flawed decision-making processes, a lack of documentary evidence and the Scottish Government ignoring alarm bells that have gone off repeatedly. Therefore, it is understandable that there is a lot of interest in the report.

Exhibit 1 shows that, in August 2015, ministers announced Ferguson Marine Engineering Ltd—FMEL—as the preferred bidder. Will you tell me more about the decision making on that? I believe that there were seven bids from six companies. Who took the decision to award the contract to FMEL, taking into account the fact that the report says that FMEL’s bid was the most expensive?

In September, CMAL advised Transport Scotland of the risks and stated its preference to start the procurement process again. The report states:

“Transport Scotland fully appraised Scottish ministers of the significant financial and procurement risks”.

In October, Transport Scotland advised CMAL that Scottish ministers were aware of the risk and were content for CMAL to award the contract to FMEL. Is there any documentation to show that, and to explain the reasons why the contract still went ahead?

I am sorry, but did you say that there are two groups? You said that one met for the first time in March—which I take to be March 2022—and another group is due to meet for the first time in June 2022. Are there two different groups considering the matter?