Key ferry-flippers Neil Bibby (Lab) and Russell Findlay (Con
There is no comment in the above top BBC Scotland story today from opposition parties, as they sail, rudderless, toward their extinction event in May. The reason is clear. They don’t want their historical hypocrisy in ferry flipping exposed.
Early criticism: “Don’t rig contracts to favour Ferguson.” Later flipped criticism: “Why aren’t you favouring Ferguson?”
Here is a quick AI-assisted (Chatgpt) account of that flipping.
You’re right to focus on that—it’s one of the more striking features of the whole ferries saga. The positions of opposition parties (especially the Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Labour) shifted noticeably over time, depending on whether the issue was risk/competence or jobs/industrial strategy.
Here’s a clearer timeline of that “flip”:
🔄 Phase 1: Opposition to awarding work to Ferguson Marine (c. 2015–2019)
Context
- The contract for dual-fuel ferries (Hull 801/802) was awarded to Ferguson Marine Engineering Ltd.
- The yard later collapsed and was nationalised by the Scottish Government in 2019.
Opposition stance at the time
Figures like Russell Findlay and others argued:
- The contract award looked politically driven
- Procurement may have been flawed or biased
- Ferguson was not the safest or most credible bidder
👉 Core argument:
“This contract should not have been awarded like this (or to this yard).”
This is the phase closest to opposing direct or preferential awards.
⚖️ Phase 2: Scrutiny after nationalisation (2019–2022)
Context
- Ferguson Marine becomes publicly owned: Ferguson Marine (Port Glasgow) Ltd
- Costs balloon, delays grow, and the ferries become a major political issue.
Opposition stance
Politicians like Neil Bibby:
- Questioned procurement decisions and governance
- Highlighted cost overruns and delays
- Criticised lack of transparency
👉 Core argument:
“This project has been mishandled and shouldn’t have been set up this way.”
Still broadly consistent with scepticism about favouring the yard.
🔁 Phase 3: Criticism when contracts go elsewhere (2023–2024)
Context
- New CalMac ferry contracts (e.g. small vessel replacement programme) are awarded to overseas yards rather than Ferguson Marine.
Opposition reaction
Many of the same parties/figures now argued:
- Why isn’t the Scottish Government supporting its own nationalised yard?
- Jobs and shipbuilding capacity in Scotland are being undermined
- Government should be doing more to secure work for Ferguson
👉 Core argument:
“Why aren’t these contracts being given to Ferguson Marine?”
🧠 The tension in one sentence
- Early criticism: “Don’t rig contracts to favour Ferguson.”
- Later criticism: “Why aren’t you favouring Ferguson?”
Discover more from Talking-up Scotland
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Talking-up Scotland 
Seems the Scottish Govt can’t do right for doing wrong. Rocks and hard places. Was there ever a government so closely scrutinised in every single detail?
Even when they do the right thing, it somehow turns out to be wrong in the eyes of the opposition. They just cannot win.
Let’s hope the Scottish public see through this fog and make the right decision in May.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Its not that long ago that the SG was accused corruption in giving the contracts to Ferguson what a bunch of hypocrites these yoons are.
LikeLiked by 1 person
They are worse than hypocrites, they are scheming, lying propagandists and the enemy of Scotland and the Scottish people. It’s incredibly sinister but nothing new, the SNP are a threat to the BritNat/Eng establishment and they are determined to put Scotland in it’s place again, begging, on your knees, accept your lot, don’t question colonisation of your country, and if you don’t like it there’s the door LOL.
I have a book, well too many but one is called, The Union of 1707, by Iain Rose, and wait for it, produced for ‘BBC Education Scotland’, 1996! Anyways, page 40, ‘the union of today’ there is the Burn’s poem ‘such a parcel of Rogues’ and this, In 1707, Fletcher of Saltoun saw that there was no way for the Scots to change the Act of Union if they became unhappy with it. He said, this will be the result of being one country and not two. It will be turned against the Scots and the Scottish memebers of parliament can dance around to all Eternity in a trap they made for themselves’. Not sure why ‘Eternity’ has a capital ‘e’. So there it is, or was, yet so incorrect, because Scotland as a country was not extinquished, was it?
NO THANKS!!!
LikeLike
In Christian theology, a capital
E is used to represent the timeless, eternal nature of God, or the afterlife (heaven). It highlights the “everlasting” state of existence as a proper noun in this context.
LikeLiked by 1 person