Since a Mull councillor shouted that CalMac was the ‘worst ferry service in the world’, unchallenged on BBC Scotland, a few months ago, I’ve been scouring for evidence.
I’ve done this because as a recovering sociologist, media feeding frenzies like the one we’ve seen on Scotland’s ferries make me twitch. I think, hang on, maybe there’s a yawning chasm emerging here, between the world of panic being constructed and the facts on the ground and that I should be looking into that chasm.
What do I mean by the facts on the ground?
Well, importantly compared with other comparable ferry services, how well does CalMac do on these key criteria:
- Passenger and staff safety
- Service in terms of number of vessels, ports and, of course, smaller vulnerable communities
- Cost in terms of affordability and generosity of government subsidy
- Reliability in terms of the percentage of sailings on time
- Investment in terms of age of vessels
CalMac’s performance on these criteria is fully transparent, like that of Scotland’s health, crime and education statistics. Regrettably, few other ferry services are under such scrutiny so the following comparisons will be at times difficult. Of course, a ferry service fully open to scrutiny is by definition better than one where facts are hidden.
Comparable?
CalMac operates 34 vessels to over 50 ports and harbours including 22 islands.
There are , just on that, comparable services in Indonesia, Bangladesh, New Zealand, Australia, Greece, Norway, Washington State and British Columbia. There may be others. If you can offer comparable evidence for these, please post that below.
I’m going to quickly take out Indonesia and Bangladesh on the first criterion, safety, as they regularly see the sinking of overcrowded vessels with multiple loss of life.
I’ll take Greece out too in the wake of the recent incident where a later-arriving passenger was pushed to his death by the crew. Regular reports of overcrowded and unsanitary vessels would also disqualify Greece.
I have to take Norway and New Zealand out as the unavailability of subsidy figures makes it impossible to compare cost in terms of affordability. That both are fully independent and Norway is massively rich would also make comparisons with Scotland problematic.
Australia can be quickly eliminated on cost as the government subsidy of only £3.86 per journey is dwarfed by that of Scotland at £29.80 per journey.
Washington State Ferries and British Columbia Ferries offer useful comparison with Scotland, WSF operates 21 vessels to 20 locations and BC ferries operates 41 vessels to 47 locations. Both services are managed by agencies responsible to and funded by devolved governments, as is the case in Scotland.
Bother, however, have the advantage of operating in the more affluent areas around Seattle and Vancouver and in warmer, less stormy seas on the Pacific west coast.
So, back to the criteria.
All three, WSF, BC Ferries and CalMac, are safe.
The Scottish Government subsidy to make prices affordable to all, at £29.80 per journey is nearly twice that of BC at £16,36.
For WSF, subsidy data per journey is not available but a 15 minute crossing from Vashon Island to Seattle costs $27 or £22 while a comparable crossing from Largs to Cumbrae is £13.90.
Reliability comparisons are difficult as only CalMac has to do daily figures. CalMac is currently averaging 95.4% on time.
WSF’s reliability is, according to reports, ‘the worst ever’ and BC Ferries is having an ‘unmitigated disaster.’
Washington State Ferries currently have 6 out of 21 ferries in docks and BC Ferries has 4 in dock. CalMac has, I think, only 2 in dock.
Finally on investment in new ferries, the average age of a CalMac ferry is 23, for BC Ferries it’s 36. For WSF, the average age is not published but 11 of the 21 are over 40 years old. Only 1 of CalMac’s 34 vessels is that age.
The governments of Washington State and British Columbia are never blamed in the media for anything to do with ferries.
Sources:
Ernst and Young https://www.transport.gov.scot/publication/strategic-framework-of-options-for-the-chfs-network-project-neptune/benchmarking/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_State_Ferries
Talking-up Scotland / Scottish media fact checking is like shooting fish in a barrel 
Ehm “The Scottish Government subsidy to make prices affordable to all, at £29.80 per journey is nearly twice that of BC at £16,36”
?
LikeLiked by 1 person
29.80 vs 32.72
not nearly?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sorry John, I totally misinterpreted what you had written..
Mea culpa..
LikeLiked by 3 people
Sometimes providing a subsidy is not acknowledged or its consequences are themselves a source of complaint by intended beneficiaries. In a March 2020 report for Transport Scotland entitled ‘Evaluation of Road Equivalent Tariff on the Clyde and Hebridean Network’ there is this (with my emphasis):
‘Across the network, it is estimated that THE AVERAGE FARE PAID PER PASSENGER AND CAR DROPPED BY 34% AND 40% RESPECTIVELY. These figures take account of all discounts and concessions.’
But there is this from primary research with ferry users: ‘‘Of those who were aware of RET, only around a quarter could estimate their pre-RET fare, suggesting that THE SCALE OF THE FARES REDUCTION HAS BEEN FORGOTTEN RELATIVELY QUICKLY, with RET fares being the new norm.’
The report assesses how much RET has cost the government: ‘It is estimated that RET is now costing the Scottish Government around £25m per annum in revenue support, of which around two thirds is attributable to RET for vehicles less than 6m in length.’
And ‘Since RET was first introduced in 2008, it has cost the Scottish Government a cumulative £120m (to 2018) in reduced fares revenue. As previously noted, the expansion of RET to the 2015 islands has significantly ramped-up the annual funding requirement, such that around £100m of revenue support will be required every four years to maintain RET fares at their current level (compared to their previous non-RET level).
So a substantial subsidy of fares directed at supporting island communities but forgotten by many who have benefited. Moreover, from the report it would appear that residents of Mull didn’t or don’t like RET subsidy. This despite the following findings:
‘The Passengers – Key Points
■ There was a significant reduction in passenger fares across all Inner Hebrides routes.
■ The largest proportional reduction in fares was on the Tobermory – Kilchoan route – this is significant as this route is used by school children travelling from Ardnamurchan to Tobermory.
■ The 34% reduction in passenger fares on the Oban – Craignure route is also significant given the comparatively high volume of foot passengers on that route.’
‘Cars – Key Points
■ The reduction in car fares on the Inner Hebrides routes was also significant, with all routes experiencing marked reductions in fares.
■ Of particular significance is the 62% reduction in fares on the Oban – Craignure route. Vehicle fares on the main route to Mull had historically been a deterrent to travel, but a reduction of this scale makes it significantly easier and more attractive to take a car on the ferry.’
Source: https://www.transport.gov.scot/media/49397/evaluation-of-road-equivalent-tariff-on-the-clyde-and-hebridean-network.pdf
LikeLiked by 4 people
There you go again , John , trying to undermine the renowned Scottish broadcaster , BBCScorchedland , using FACTS !
That will never catch on with the MSM when it comes to SNPbaaaad stories !
LikeLiked by 4 people
Proof that you can prove anything with statistics if you are selective enough. By the same measure I could prove that the over-ripe banana in my fruit bowl is the best banana in the world, providing I exclude all the bananas in other houses because that information isn’t available.
You’ve excluded Norway and New Zealand on subsidy grounds, but you’re looking for the best service, not the best value to the taxpayer. Given the astonishingly high subsidy CalMac gets it would be unlikely to do well in terms of value for money to the taxpayer … a bit like the two new ferries under construction in Greenock.
To find the best service you need to look at the needs of the customers and then evaluate whether those needs are being served. If you ask the islanders who use these ferries every day, you will get a resounding No.
LikeLike
What rubbish, Cal Mac is supposed to support island communities but actually in the list of priorities, they are last after: The Scottish government, transport Scotland, local councils, the Board, the C level management, the unions, the transport companies, tourist operators and other business operators, tourists and car owners. It’s over staffed, incompetent, with excessive pay rates and waste but everyone concerned is happy with the status quo. You should look at NZ because it is comparable and with tweaks that model would probably fit Scotland better
LikeLike