CHRIS McEleny continues to make a case for future ferry orders to be placed at his local Port Glasgow yard, which is still unable to hand over the two now internationally infamous ferries (Shipyard will close if government does not directly award orders, Mar 4). Regardless of the very obvious failures of the past he hopes that some kind of strange, possibly illegal, procurement process will guarantee all future CalMac ferries will be built at the yard. This would in fact not be a procurement process, with tenders and bidders, but a guarantee of jobs at any cost and in any timescale.
He attempts to lay the blame for this project’s failures on the choice of dual-fuel propulsion systems. In fact the engines in question were actual purchased off the shelf from the Finnish company Wartsila and were shipped ready assembled to Fergusons. I believe Fergusons took delivery of the four dual-fuel engines and two back-up engines which can use diesel or liquefied natural gas (LNG) over five years ago.
READ MORE: Fears extremism definition change could hit Scottish independence activism
Wartsila has been selling dual-fuel marine engines that can run off LNG directly, switching seamlessly back to diesel when required with no impact on performance, since 2003. There are currently several hundred LNG-powered ships in use or under construction worldwide. In the face of the climate change emergency, some would argue we should have been looking at more radical zero-emission solutions such as hydrogen. When hydrogen is used as a fuel – either burned in an engine or used in a fuel cell to generate electricity – the only by-product is water.
The Port Glasgow yard’s track record so far does not fill anyone with confidence. The hundreds of millions of pounds of project overspend has been siphoned from other parts of the Scottish Government’s limited coffers. Those hundreds of millions of pounds could have been spent on the Scottish health service, employing hundreds of doctors, nurses and support staff. I note Mr McEleny fails to address the £128 million consumed by the yard which the Auditor General is still unable to locate.
READ MORE: Independent Scotland will not commit to treaty banning nuclear weapons
If Mr McEleny wanted to build an extension to his home, would his first and only choice be the builder who after an extra five years is still unable to complete his neighbour’s home extension and at currently five times the original cost? I rather doubt it.
The “ferry fiasco”, as it has come to be known, has done much to reduce the Scottish Government and SNP’s credibility and reputation for good governance, a fact that sadly will soon be expressed in terms of voter preferences at many future elections.
Mr McEleny asks us “should Scottish Government procurement prioritise building up our own industrial capacity to protect jobs in Scotland and to keep wages in our own local economy?” The answer to that question is: prioritise, possibly yes – but not at just any cost.
Glenda Burns
Glasgow
NOBODY is willing to accept blame for any link in the chain of events that led to the near collapse of Scottish shipbuilding. Fortunately Chris McEleny is not afraid to take responsibility for his part in the action that saved the contract and the shipyard.
His in-depth experience of the crisis may yet provide the necessary guidance that saves shipbuilding in Scotland.
READ MORE: Three key points in independence paper on 'Scotland's place in world'
The Scottish Government certainly had the power to act when the ferries contract got into difficulties, as shipbuilding is a devolved matter, however the seven new ferries are an entirely different matter as there are there are no contracts in place.
It is only a matter of weeks since a contract for the new Scilly Isles ferries, that it was hoped would be built in the UK funded by the UK Government Levelling Up scheme, was awarded by the ferry operators to a French shipping company that intends to sub-contract the building of the vessels to a shipyard in Turkey.
Perhaps Chris McEleny can explain in simple terms, for those of us who want to see at least all the ferries for Scottish routes built in Scotland, how the Scottish Government can bypass open tendering and award these contracts directly to a Scottish yard.
John Jamieson
South Queensferry
JUST to thank you for your intention to have an “All Women’s National” on International Women’s Day. Not only are you the only newspaper supporting independence, you will possibly be the only one promoting women on International Women’s Day.
On consideration, I decided what I enjoy most in The National are the excellent columnists. Then I realised the ones I like best are mostly women! Ruth Wishart, Lesley Riddoch etc. I enjoy Owen Jones too, so I don’t think I deliberately seek out female writers. In saying that, Selma Rahman’s contributions to the letters page are always a good read!
READ MORE: The National launches historic newspaper created by all-woman team
Although I’m in my 70s and feel like I’ve “seen it all”, reading The National makes me feel bang up to date with the news and everything that’s happening in politics and it keeps me motivated when I feel we’re going nowhere.
So, thanks again for the idea of a Women’s National and for the best newspaper on the news stands.
Ann Leitch
via email
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