Seòmar agus comataidhean

So—

Good morning. Before I come to a substantive question, as the convener asked about procurement, there is an issue that I wondered whether Kevin Hobbs might help me with. I put in a question to the Minister for Transport in January, which was answered somewhat cryptically, and I wondered whether I could get a clear answer from you.

I asked whether there were clauses in the contract with Cemre in Turkey for the two ferries to serve the Islay route that stipulated that Scottish, UK or other European businesses should form part of the supply chain, where possible. Were there any such clauses in the contract?

I understand. Thank you very much.

I have a brief preliminary question for Kevin Hobbs, because I did not quite understand something that the chair said earlier. In her opening remarks, she said that the operator dictates the specification of the vessels. However, we have a press release from CMAL that says that it is considering a catamaran for a particular route, and the chair said earlier that you are looking at alternative tonnage. What is the reality? Will you explain who dictates what vessels look like and which vessels are ordered?

Yes. I have a brief question about something that came out of the earlier session. When you were watching that session, minister, I am sure that you heard that CMAL did not stipulate in the contract for the new ferries in Turkey that, where possible, the Scottish and/or UK supply chain should be used. Would the Scottish Government have preferred to see that clause in the contract? Would it prefer to see such clauses used in the future? If so, have you indicated that to CMAL?

I understand—thank you. Sticking with that press release, I note that, later on, it says:

“We will only ever order the vessels best suited to the routes and communities they are intended to serve.”

In previous evidence sessions, the committee heard from various communities that CMAL is procuring vessels and hardware improvements that appear not to be the best, or that do not accord with consultations that have taken place. If that is correct, how come there is a disconnect between CMAL’s position as stated in that press release, for example, and what appears to be the perceived reality?

I understand, but it was for CMAL to put a stipulation in the contract to say that, if it is possible to use Scottish suppliers, that should be the preference. It was for CMAL to make that decision.

I would be very grateful for that.

I understand the point that is being made and I accept, minister, that, if it was an open tendering process, that is fine. However, at some point, a decision was made. As I understand it, the contract is a standard Baltic and International Maritime Council one. I presume that, at some point, CMAL could have said as part of the negotiation that it wished to add a clause that said that, wherever possible, the yard would use the UK or Scottish supply chain. It has not done that. As a Government minister, would you have preferred that it had? In any event, when other procurement exercises take place, would you prefer CMAL to stipulate, as part of the contract negotiations, that UK and/or Scottish supply chains need to be used?

Thank you. The substantive question that I have at this stage is about Transport Scotland’s consultation on the “Islands Connectivity Plan: Long-Term Plan for Vessels and Ports on the Clyde & Hebrides and Northern Isles networks (2023-2045)”, which states:

“We will reduce the average age of the fleet to around 15 years by the end of this decade.”

How does CMAL intend to achieve that, particularly given the chair’s earlier comment that it is for the operator to dictate the spec?

Given that, the question begged is simply whether Transport Scotland’s statement on its aim to reduce the average age of the fleet to 15 years by the end of the decade will be realised, particularly given the funding situation that you alluded to, Kevin.