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 4 July 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 3287 contributions

|

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

Richard Leonard

The First Minister stands up in Parliament and says that, in the end, she is responsible but she was not involved in the decision. Is that what you are saying?

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

Richard Leonard

When you say that it is a decision entirely for the minister, the finance secretary does not have a role in that.

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

Richard Leonard

Okay. You say that it is the responsibility of the minister, but it is the responsibility of the civil service to give the minister advice on issues around the value for money, propriety and regularity of the contract that is about to be entered into. Under some circumstances, if it is believed that the deal runs contrary to those values, it would be expected that written authority would need to be given.

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

Richard Leonard

In your opening remarks, you said that you accept in full all the recommendations of the Audit Scotland report. However, you do not seem to accept the recommendation that says that there was a huge gap in the supporting paperwork—which required to be logged—that lay behind the decision to award the contract to FMEL.

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

Richard Leonard

Maybe it was more a conclusion than a recommendation.

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

Richard Leonard

We are limited for time, so I have just one other question before I bring in Willie Coffey. You alluded to the permanent secretary, who, in correspondence with the Finance and Public Administration Committee, recently said:

“there is no overarching statutory duty to record all decisions in a particular way”.

Do you consider that the lack of such a statutory duty contributed to the failure to record the important decision by the Scottish ministers on 9 October 2015 to award the contract?

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

Richard Leonard

I am not sure that I got an answer to my question about the challenge function and the role of the director general of finance. “Transport Scotland Framework Document”, which was published in 2012—it was applicable at the time of awarding the contract—says clearly that one of the roles of the portfolio accountable officer within the directorate general is to challenge.

Roy, you are now the DG in the relevant department—albeit that it has changed its name—and, formerly, you were the chief executive of Transport Scotland. Do you not see that there should have been a role for the DG accountable officer to challenge? Was there such a 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

Richard Leonard

However, from what we have heard this morning, the lines of challenge that we would expect to be in place for a contract of that size appear not to have been in place or to have operated or worked, and the framework document appears to be a piece of paper rather than a living document. It was a framework document that gathered dust, rather than leading to the correct challenges being made to those decisions.

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

Richard Leonard

Our view is that the concerns that were raised by CMAL extend beyond the description “a particular issue”. There were pretty comprehensive concerns about the risks involved in placing the orders.

For the third and final time, was there a role in that process for the director general of finance?

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

Richard Leonard

Okay. We do not know whether they were satisfied or not and, with hindsight of what happened to the project, we can speculate about whether “satisfied” comes anywhere close to it.

I invite Colin Beattie to come in with questions on his area of inquiry.