Ludo Thierry
Some rather interesting and enlightening evidence was presented at the Holyrood Committee looking into the Calmac Ferries’ order story. Wow – The CMAL Directors are taking no nonsense and no prisoners – A little reality check for the britnat MSPs trying their darnedest to suggest that the Scottish Govt would apply the sort of business tactics that their beloved Westminster/Whitehall crew routinely would do.
Facts and figures from CMAL, arguably, do point to a scandal – just not the fictional ‘scandal’ which the britnats have been trying so very hard to create. Link and snippets below:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-51825113
The directors of a ferry company at the centre of a dispute into two delayed and over budget ships have told an inquiry the firm building them was “hopelessly inefficient”.
Bosses at Caledonian Marine Assets Limited (CMAL) Kevin Hobbs and James Anderson said builders Ferguson Marine were the “masters of their own demise”.
They were giving evidence at an inquiry into the deal at Holyrood.
CMAL bosses’ evidence to the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee follows a session in December in which MSPs heard from former finance secretary Derek Mackay that the ferries would be delayed and could more than double their initial price.
He also claimed mismanagement at Ferguson Marine was to blame for the problem.
The shipyard was bought over by Scottish ministers in August last year, after it collapsed into administration.
However, in February former Ferguson director Jim McColl blamed CMAL for the delay and the projected overspend during his appearance at the inquiry.
He said there were repeated changes made to the specification of the ships.
He also claimed First Minister Nicola Sturgeon announced the details of the ferry contract, including the cost of the vessels, before it had been agreed.
Turning to Mr McColl’s assertion that CMAL kept changing the designs, Kevin Hobbs told the committee that Ferguson’s were “not being truthful”.
He added that 111 changes were looked at. Of these, 30 were never progressed after discussion, while 46 changes were prompted by Ferguson and 35 prompted by CMAL.
Mr Hobbs added that CMAL had to pay £1.55m for the changes it asked for.
What Ferguson is describing when it talks about changes are “their own mistakes”, he added.
Talking-up Scotland 'Albatraz' 
Heh. I know businesses will always protect their own backs by whatever means, but I can imagine this version is exactly right – Fergusons excuses were always too close to those used by businesses that are ‘at it’, and they sounded thoroughly unpleasant to work with. Pure supposition and speculation on my part!
LikeLiked by 1 person
None of us will ever know the inside story on this and all the people and organisations involved will naturally seek to protect their positions and reputations. However there is another way to look at this: It’s claimed that the First Minister announced the contract and its value before a deal had been definitively struck. But how could she have known a figure to make such a statement? She wouldn’t just have made a number up and then announced it, so one of the parties would have had to give her the details in the knowledge that the deal wasn’t yet finalised. So who had most to gain from the premature announcement? Certainly not Fergusons, but CMAL, by so doing, would be able to box Fergusons in to a price of CMAL’s choosing.
Take your pick, but my hunch is that CMAL saw an opportunity to indulge in what the Americans call “wrestlers’ tricks” to gain the upper hand.
LikeLike
Well the “Wrestler Tricks” worked for CMAL bursting Fergusons and doubling the price of the Ferries.
LikeLike
Has Jim McColl ever screwed up on a project before. It’s hard to see any sense in Fergusons / McColl Agreeing on a fixed price before the design was finalised, plus the propulsion system is not one the yard had any experience in.
My hunch is the yard’s engineers lacked the required experience / technical ability ( propulsion system’s certification process and importantly timescale) and misled McColl and his team.
LikeLike
I cannot see why any company would enter into a fixed price contract on a reasearch and development project – there must have been caveats/recompense arrangements in place, surely. I think the design was meant to be on-going during the manufacturing process?
Clydebank, you could be right about McColl being misled, or it could be they were all misleading each other?
LikeLike