Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

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 12 April 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1492 contributions

|

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 5 February 2025

Jamie Greene

Absolutely.

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 5 February 2025

Jamie Greene

What are the intentions for the long-term future of the yard? Is it still the stated intention of the Scottish Government to return the yard to private ownership? If so, when will that happen?

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 5 February 2025

Jamie Greene

Right.

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 5 February 2025

Jamie Greene

I will spread my questions across two parts, because other members would like to come in.

Mr Petticrew, it is really good to hear of your passion for the yard. I know that you inherited what has, over the years, been a very difficult situation on the journey to deliver ferries. Anyone who lives, works or has roots in that part of the world will share your ambition to see the yard succeed. I hope that we will talk a little more about its future, in due course.

I will pick up on one or two things. I will talk about the budget and finances briefly. In our evidence session on 16 January, there was some confusion over some of the numbers involved, so I want to see whether we can clarify them—in particular, about the money that the Scottish Government has allocated to the yard.

10:30  

The Parliament agreed to the general principles of the Budget (Scotland) (No 4) Bill at stage 1 yesterday. The draft budget has a line for Ferguson Marine of £47.9 million for the coming financial year. In addition, a statement was made last year about £14.2 million of capital funding being made available for—I presume—investment in and upgrading of the yard’s infrastructure. Perhaps sitting alongside that is a pot of cash to complete the MV Glen Rosa. We will come to that in a second.

Can we clarify the numbers? Does the £47 million or £48 million in the draft budget include or exclude the £14 million of capital expenditure? Will any money that is needed in addition to what has already been put aside to complete the Glen Rosa—it sounds like it might incur more costs—come out of that, or is there a separate pot of cash to complete the Glen Rosa?

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 5 February 2025

Jamie Greene

What happens if Mr Petticrew crunches the numbers, comes to you and says that the second vessel will cost £X more? Do you have headway in the £47 million, or would you have to seek extra cash from the Government?

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 5 February 2025

Jamie Greene

I presume that if it was a small figure, you could scratch around in the Government coffers and find it, but what if it was in the millions?

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 5 February 2025

Jamie Greene

Absolutely. We all share that view.

I have a final question in this section, before I let other members come in, although I will come back later to talk about the future of the yard. My question is about a general feeling that I get from what I have heard this morning and from some of the other commentary that we have had.

Mr Irwin, you said in your opening statement that the failings were unacceptable, and I thank you for that. All the blame, though, seems to have been put at the door of Mr Tydeman, the former CEO, but he is just one of a number of CEOs who have been through the revolving door of Ferguson Marine over the years. This is just an observation, but I get the impression that he has been made something of a scapegoat for many of the long-term failings in delivering the project on time and on budget.

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 5 February 2025

Jamie Greene

At the moment, the yard is obviously striving to secure new business. I have no view on this, but does the fact that the yard is publicly owned—or state owned, if you prefer that terminology—inhibit or improve its ability to compete for, tender for and win new business? That has never really been clear to me.

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 5 February 2025

Jamie Greene

You talked about a couple of potential orders. I recall my first visit to the yard, in 2016, when I sat with the then owner of the yard in the boardroom, where I am sure you have had a number of meetings over the years. I was given a very lengthy presentation about the pipeline of business that it was pitching and bidding for and the business that it was in advanced conversations about. To my knowledge, not one of those possibilities came to fruition or came to pass due to the situation that the yard found itself in, the receivership and eventual nationalisation. The list of business that it was pitching for was very long.

You mentioned that there are potentially a couple of contracts coming through. What I am getting at is whether, when the Glen Rosa sets sail later this year, we hope, there will still be 290 people working in the yard. Will there be enough business to keep them in work?

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 5 February 2025

Jamie Greene

Are you saying that you can be beaten on price because Turkey and countries in Asia and in the middle east will build ships cheaper, for many different reasons, including reasons that perhaps we would not agree with, such as the conditions for their workforce, how much they pay their staff, and their health and safety records—the things that we like to excel at in our shipbuilding community in Scotland? Therefore, is your plea to the Government that, that issue aside, it should look at the wider macroeconomic benefits of putting this work into Inverclyde? Is that what you are saying?