Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Committee

Public Audit Committee 28 April 2022

28 Apr 2022 · S6 · Public Audit Committee

Item of business

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Dowey, Sharon Con South Scotland Watch on SPTV

Good morning. I start by going over a point that was raised at last week’s meeting, when I asked about the decision to continue with the contract with FMEL, rather than going back to the tendering process as was CMAL’s preference at that point. Gill Miller said: “Transport Scotland submitted a paper to ministers to say that FMEL was the preferred bidder and that the First Minister would be announcing that at a visit to the yard on 31 August 2015.” She went on to say, “we know that the pre-qualification exercise made it clear that the provision of a 100 per cent refund guarantee was mandatory” and “We asked Transport Scotland and the Scottish Government for all documentation relating to the minister’s decision, but we did not receive any.” At that meeting, Antony Clark said: “one would expect the accountable officer in Transport Scotland to share their thoughts, ideas, risks and concerns, and to make proposals to the Scottish ministers, on which ministers can reflect and make a formal decision. As the Auditor General has indicated, one would expect that to be recorded and documented.” Later in the meeting, Mr Boyle, you said: “We do not entirely know whether this is a case of there being no document to support that important decision, or of our having asked for one and of its not being provided.”—Official Report, Public Audit Committee, 21 April 2022; c 26, 28, 27 and 29. The whole scenario gives great cause for concern regarding transparency and secrecy issues in the Scottish Government, and the reasons behind why that critical information has not been recorded. It could appear that, after having announced FMEL as the preferred bidder on 31 August, the First Minister would not have wanted to announce the very next month that the bid was not valid as a result of a builder’s refund guarantee not being given and that the Government was going back to the tendering process. It is not good practice for the concerns of CMAL not to be taken into consideration, and for CMAL to be overruled by Transport Scotland and Scottish ministers, but it is totally unacceptable for the meetings and decisions not to have been recorded. I have two questions. Do you think that there were political motives and pressures from the Scottish Government that led to the failings in the process and the continuation of the contract with FMEL? Would such a decision have been taken by a minister or cabinet secretary, by the First Minister or by the Cabinet as a whole, and who would have been responsible and accountable for recording all the minutes of the meetings and the decisions that came from them?

Search Hansard contributions

Public Audit Committee 28 April 2022

In the same item of business