On 1 May 2022, the Herald’s Ferry Correspondent, Martin Williams, announced:
MINISTERS have been accused of a “scandalous” waste of over £110m by failing to use catamarans instead of two new alternative lifeline vessels which are now being built in Turkey.
This was the catamaran project:
Ministers have come under fire as an £800m scheme to create a Clyde shipbuilding revolution and solve Scotland’s ferry crisis with a fleet of 50 catamarans has been sunk.
Fronted by Stuart Ballantyne, a Scottish naval architect and chairman of Australian marine consulting firm Sea Transport Solutions whose designs are used in around 50 countries, the Clyde Catamaran Group has had meetings with ministers over the new ferries built over 20 years would cost a fraction of those currently being built.
Before I launched my own ferry career, did any Scottish journalist think to check if other catamaran projects in similar northern waters had gone well, say in Canada’s British Columbia?
Might they have found this story?
They might be the most infamous ships in the history of British Columbia: three B.C. Ferries that were hundreds of millions of dollars over budget, couldn’t run as fast or efficiently as promised, and were partly responsible for sinking the NDP government of the 1990s.
The project was officially unveiled in 1994, with the aluminum catamarans deviating from the standard B.C. Ferries design.
Two successive NDP premiers (Mike Harcourt and Glen Clark) believed they would cut sailing times on the Vancouver-Nanaimo ferry route by 30 minutes, while also kickstarting a new era for the province’s shipbuilding industry.
But the vessels cost double what they were originally budgeted for. When finished, they ended up not significantly cutting crossing times, had mechanical issues, and created dangerous waves and additional pollution.
The opposition B.C. Liberal Party frequently used the ferries as an example of NDP mismanagement on their way to winning 77 of 79 seats in the 2001 election, and subsequently sold the boats in 2003 to Washington Marine Group for $20 million.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/fastcat-ferries-facebook-marketplace-1.7080937
Video of the scandal here: https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1555938883743
Footnote: the average of operating ferries is between 20 and 30 years .
Talking-up Scotland 'Albatraz' 
Why have catamarans not taken over as ferries everywhere, especially on the short Dover to Calais route?
Anyone fancy a rough night on a catamaran on the Aberdeen to Lerwick ferry route?
LikeLiked by 4 people
Because these ferries are run by private companies and are, by definition efficient, clean and punctual because competition demands that they be so, otherwise competitors would take over, if any competitors were allowed to run or were actually competing rather being part of a nod-and-wink cartel.
Calmac is a publicly owned company and is, bu definition inefficient and not publicly-focussed, they way private companies are, and in hock to the trade unions.
Stands to reason doesn’t it?
The Herald is owned by a privately owned company which makes its profits by advertising, including for private transport companies.
LikeLiked by 1 person
BBC ‘reporters’ cannot, count, read a balance sheet or understand statistics. Their ignorance and arrogance is there for all to view. No wonder viewing and readership are falling. A total waste of public monies. The BBC failure. A total drain on public finances. The lack of research complacent and untrue. A total embarrassment. Absolute nonsense.
LikeLiked by 1 person
John,
I heard the average wage in the shipyard in the Philippines where the MV Pewas built around £8000 a year? Perhaps you could check?
At that level of wage no wonder the ships are cheap and as far as quality goes your guess is as good as mine. Ruth Davidson was all for buying these ferries to replace all Scotland’s. She even tweeted so….
LikeLiked by 2 people
It’s a bit unfair to criticise all twin hull designs from these examples, but let’s face one glaring and obvious fact – The nautical experts and engineers who made the decisions ultimately on behalf of Calmac will have examined all options before the decision to commissioning vessels ever arose.
It is not down to a Herald scribbler or a salesman or whoever is behind the campaign to asset strip Calmac to question those decisions via a supportive media any more than you or I.
The propaganda game relies on attributing personal preferences and political interferences to the decisions made rather than stone cold engineering assessments and financial judgements, just as it was for Mr McColl….
LikeLiked by 5 people
‘let’s face one glaring and obvious fact – The nautical experts and engineers who made the decisions ultimately on behalf of Calmac will have examined all options before the decision to commissioning vessels ever arose.’
Completely agree! And these senior executives of CalMac and perhaps more importantly of CMAL, their technical middle managers and potentially external technical advisors, all employed by or contracted to a publicly-owned company (no dividend bonanza in play here!), applied their ‘expertise’ to an options appraisal – on more than one occasion, over many years – and came to a considered decision to commission the building of monohull ferries. Is there any evidence that any of these people had an intrinsic, personal conflict of interest – financial or otherwise – which led them to favour monohull designs?
Is there any hard evidence that the decision to build monohull ferries was based on anything other than legitimate expert assessments and recommendations which then influenced the content of tender documentation: is there any evidence that this was NOT based on objective assessments by CMAL/CalMac of needs and wants for vessels based e.g. on evidence of operating conditions – at sea and in relation to existing post facilities? If this is contested, let those concerned expose the counter evidence.
Of course, other ‘experts’ not in decision making positions may take a different view – that’s life, it’s not unusual NOT to have consensus! Moreover, others with a commercial interest in their ‘product’ gaining market advantage and increased market share may express a different view in order to influence strategic procurement decisions – that’s life, it’s not unusual to push what would be advantageous to you. When the mainstream media gets involved, framing their coverage in favour of just one side of what MAY be a legitimate technical difference of view – and arguably politicising the issues into the bargain as part of a wider ‘agenda’ – we move from ‘it’s not unusual’ to ‘that’s the reality of Scotland’s polity nowadays’!
LikeLiked by 3 people
Martin, all at sea, with one oar.
gavinochiltree
LikeLiked by 2 people