Skip to main content
Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 10 July 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1169 contributions

|

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 9 June 2022

Sharon Dowey

In your opening statement, you said that you accepted all the recommendations in the Audit Scotland report. Can I double check that that is the case? Are there any recommendations in that report that you have any reservations about?

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 9 June 2022

Sharon Dowey

Good morning. Paragraphs 104 to 109 of the report, starting on page 45, outline how the Scottish Government has fundamentally changed the arrangements to complete the vessels since the shipyard was brought into public ownership in December 2019. That includes the appointment of Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd as its technical consultant.

During the Public Audit Committee’s evidence session with the Auditor General for Scotland on 28 April 2022, he commented on the new arrangements, stating:

“There is no denying that the arrangements are unusual. That paragraph also notes that Transport Scotland no longer has a role in the delivery of the ships. That is quite distinct from where we were.”—[Official Report, Public Audit Committee, 28 April 2022; c 37.]

Under the new arrangements to complete the vessels, CMAL has been appointed as the Scottish Government’s technical consultant and Transport Scotland no longer has a role in the delivery of the ships. Why were those decisions taken? What work was undertaken to assess the risks associated with the change in roles?

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 9 June 2022

Sharon Dowey

Okay. You do not think that there is any conflict of interest in CMAL’s revised role.

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 9 June 2022

Sharon Dowey

Paragraph 105 on page 45 of the report states:

“in March 2021 the Scottish Government finalised the arrangements to fund and manage the vessels ... This included replacing the existing fixed-price contract between CMAL and FMPG with a new contract (for each vessel) between itself and FMPG. The Scottish Government is committed to paying the additional vessel costs, regardless of the final price.”

You have just said that you are looking for something at as low a cost as possible. Is it normal for the Scottish Government to hand a contractor a blank cheque?

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 26 May 2022

Sharon Dowey

Right.

In an evidence session that we had with the Auditor General for Scotland, he confirmed that

“In the absence of formal written authority under the terms of the Scottish public finance manual in Scotland ... If an accountable officer does not request such written authority, the accountability for the decision rests with the accountable officer.”—[Official Report, Public Audit Committee, 28 April 2022; c 28-29.]

Why would the accountable officer not have obtained that, and why would it not have been stored safely? My question is due to the number of issues that have been raised throughout.

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 26 May 2022

Sharon Dowey

How long was Mr Middleton in that role?

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 26 May 2022

Sharon Dowey

He was experienced in his role, then.

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 26 May 2022

Sharon Dowey

Was there a reason that he left? Was it for another job? What was the reason for his leaving so soon after the contract was signed?

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 26 May 2022

Sharon Dowey

The accountabilities include ensuring that risks are managed effectively and that procurement guidelines are met, and the requirement to seek written authority from ministers if any action is inconsistent with proper performance of the accountable officer’s functions.

You commented earlier that the job is to deliver on ministers’ wishes. Why would somebody with seven years’ experience not put all that into practice? Numerous concerns have been raised around the contracts. Why would somebody with that amount of experience not get written confirmation from a minister of the decisions that were made?

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 26 May 2022

Sharon Dowey

I find it hard to believe that he did not get that confirmation.

In a letter to the Cabinet Secretary for Infrastructure, Investment and Cities dated 20 August 2015, various issues are raised. Ministerial approval was “sought by ... 27 August”, which is just seven days after the letter was received, because the minister was on holiday. The letter states that the date had

“already been extended for 2 months”

—that was for signing the contracts.

Paragraph 8 states:

“CalMac will not be in a position to fully endorse the shipbuilding documentation by the required deadline”

and that

“further efforts will be undertaken during the detailed design of the vessel by FMEL to address any outstanding points.”

It goes on to highlight issues concerning

“the access of the vessels to the various ports they may serve”

and the

“requirement for modifications at some ports.”

It notes that the vessels are dual fuel, and that

“LNG brings some logistics challenges ... and may require some additional fuelling infrastructure.”

A lot of issues, including infrastructure issues, were being raised, other than just the ferries. Why was there such a last-minute rush to get that signed off? It had already been extended by two months—the minister went on holiday, and it was then given to the cabinet secretary to sign off. Why was there such a last-minute rush? Was it because of the number of issues in the contract?