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 11 August 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2597 contributions

|

Public Audit Committee

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

Meeting date: 30 June 2022

Colin Beattie

Did you ever challenge FMEL on how the money was being spent, given what was uncovered about it not paying its suppliers and so on? Was it £9 million or something?

10:00  

Public Audit Committee

Major Capital Projects

Meeting date: 30 June 2022

Colin Beattie

I will follow on from my colleague, Craig Hoy, and be absolutely parochial about this, because I am the constituency MSP for the area in which Sheriffhall falls, so I get a huge amount of correspondence on it. I put on record my support for the Sheriffhall development, but also there is massive support among residents, particularly in the Midlothian area and in the Shawfair development. There is a great deal of anxiety that the development is being delayed. There is always a fear that the longer something is delayed, the more at risk it becomes. How secure is the funding for Sheriffhall? Is it set in stone?

Public Audit Committee

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

Meeting date: 30 June 2022

Colin Beattie

Here is another easy one for you. Coming back to the BRG, which is a great bone of contention in this, when and how did CMAL first became aware that FMEL was unable to provide a full BRG?

Public Audit Committee

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

Meeting date: 30 June 2022

Colin Beattie

Were you aware that in March 2015 Scottish ministers advised FMEL that a full BRG was not required?

Public Audit Committee

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

Meeting date: 30 June 2022

Colin Beattie

Before I get into the main line of my questioning, I would like clarification on one or two points that we have already been talking about.

The first is about decision making on the contract. Audit Scotland has had access to the same exchanges, documentation and so on as everybody else. On 21 April, Audit Scotland said that it was

“clear in our judgment that there was no formal written authority.”—[Official Report, Public Audit Committee, 21 April 2022; c 36.]

Its contention relates mainly to that approval.

The CMAL paper said:

“CMAL was effectively instructed to proceed with the purchase from FMEL despite the concerns raised ... As explained in the risk paper, CMAL were not content with the final draft contracts. In these circumstances, the Ministerial approval process was not normal. CMAL made no recommendation to Transport Scotland or to the Minister.”

There is a clear trail of key decisions and the basis on which they were taken.

We have seen all the documents that have been published. I mention in particular the email from Transport Scotland dated 9 April 2015. It says:

“The Scottish Ministers have also seen and understood that [the Director of Vessels’] paper and have noted and accepted the various technical and commercial risks identified and assessed by CMAL and have indicated that they are content for CMAL to proceed with the award of the Contracts.”

It is clear from the published documents that ministers were advised of the risks that had been identified by CMAL and of the mitigations that were put in place, and came to a decision on that basis. Is that a fair assessment?

09:45  

Public Audit Committee

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

Meeting date: 30 June 2022

Colin Beattie

Good, thank you. That was an easy one.

Public Audit Committee

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

Meeting date: 30 June 2022

Colin Beattie

Okay, that is fair enough.

I will turn to the money, which is always far more interesting. There were comments in the report of 9 December 2020 by the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee that highlighted the fact that some milestone payments or stage payments were somehow out of order. The clear finding was that they were being constructed in such a way that qualification for payments was not necessarily in the order that it should have been, and so on. We have also heard that that is normal for the industry. Is it normal for the industry?

Public Audit Committee

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

Meeting date: 30 June 2022

Colin Beattie

I am a layman. I have no idea how to build a ship, but in any contract, milestones exist to say that a certain sequence of events has taken place leading to a critical point at which payment is triggered. The Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee found that that was not the case and heard evidence that that was not the case. Why is that practice okay in the industry? I am trying to understand that. To have one isolated event that will result in a payment then another isolated event that will result in a payment, although the bits in between have not been done, seems odd to me. I do not understand.

Public Audit Committee

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

Meeting date: 30 June 2022

Colin Beattie

Okay. You paid FMEL £83.25 million. That is about 85 per cent of the contract value.

Public Audit Committee

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

Meeting date: 30 June 2022

Colin Beattie

At the time of nationalisation, there was every indication that the vessels were far from ready to be launched. Did you have any questions about the amount of public funds that had been paid in, the lack of progress on these vessels and the fact that they were far behind where they should have been? Surely the milestones and the robust checks that took place should have thrown up quite clearly that some of these works were not happening.