A HOLYROOD committee has written to Nicola Sturgeon seeking specific documents around the procurement of the overdue Ferguson Marine ferries.
The convener of the Public Audit Committee also set out his “disappointment” at the level of detail he received in a submission from Cabinet Secretary Keith Brown.
The First Minister spoke to the committee in person for nearly two hours on Friday last week as it investigated issues around the Glen Sannox and the as-yet-unnamed hull 802.
During her appearance, she strongly denied a suggestion from an MSP that the contract represented “jobs for the boys”.
READ MORE: Two new ferries promised for Skye triangle routes, Scottish Government announces
Committee convener Richard Leonard also expressed his displeasure that the substantive part of Brown’s submission amounted to only 150 words.
In his latest letter to the First Minister, Leonard asks for documents and information around eight specific points.
One of these is a briefing prepared for Sturgeon ahead of the announcement of Ferguson Marine as preferred bidder on August 31, 2015.
The First Minister visited the Port Glasgow yard on this date.
It is also seeking minutes or notes of a meeting with the former owner of Ferguson Marine Jim McColl on May 31, 2017.
In his letter to Brown, Leonard said the Justice Secretary’s submission lacked detail about information which then transport secretary Derek Mackay may have shared with him in 2015.
Leonard said: “The committee asks you to revisit the first question in our original correspondence to you and provide a response to the specific question that was asked.
READ MORE: Scottish Tories show hypocrisy on 'ferries scandal' – The REAL Scottish Politics
“In more general terms, we wish to express our disappointment that the content of your letter does not provide the level of detail we would have expected, to assist our scrutiny of the Auditor General’s report.”
Leonard also wrote to Auditor General Stephen Boyle asking for a response to a letter from the ferry-owning company CMAL alleging he was mistaken in an earlier submission.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel