Confidence in the helicopter transport system for North Sea oil workers will only be restored by a full, independent public inquiry, former Labour leader Iain Gray has said.
Confidence among oil and gas workers is "so low" following the latest Super Puma crash that such an inquiry is needed, Mr Gray said.
The Scottish Government should "send an important signal" and back calls for a public inquiry, similar to that carried out by Lord Cullen in the wake of the Piper Alpha disaster 25 years ago, he said.
Mr Gray pressed Finance Secretary John Swinney on the issue as the minister gave a statement to Holyrood in the wake of the latest accident which saw three men and and one woman killed when a helicopter carrying workers from an offshore vessel crashed into the sea as it approached Shetland last Friday.
Fourteen people survived, including two crew.
Flights to and from offshore platforms have resumed following a temporary suspension, as experts said they found no information to suggest that a technical problem was to blame for the crash.
Mr Swinney stressed that "rebuilding the confidence of the men and women who travel to and from our offshore installations must be a key priority".
In April 2009 the same Super Puma model went down north-east of Peterhead on its return from a platform, killing all 14 passengers and two crew on board.
Mr Gray, Labour's finance and employment spokesman, said that in such circumstances a "wide-ranging, comprehensive and independent inquiry" is needed to restore workers' confidence in the transport.
"It is vital to restore confidence in helicopter transport for the sake of the industry but, above all, for the sake of the workforce and their families.
"However, this is the fifth incident in recent times when helicopters have ditched, with 20 lives lost in two of those accidents.
"Whatever the conclusions of the air accident investigation regarding the cause of the August 23 ditching, the truth is there are wider questions now being asked to which the workforce will need answers to their strongest satisfaction if confidence is to be regained. Indeed, confidence is now so low that an industry review will not likely be able to restore it.
"Only a wide-ranging, comprehensive and independent inquiry, like Lord Cullen's, will be able to do that, whatever the cause of the latest incident turns out to be."
He urged Mr Swinney to back this call, saying: "Beginning to rebuild confidence now, in our view, needs an early commitment. So will the Cabinet Secretary reconsider his position on this and send that important signal by supporting such an independent inquiry now."
Mr Swinney insisted that the "correct approach" is to wait for the findings from the Air Accidents Investigation Branch before deciding if a public inquiry is necessary.
"There is a set of steps that have to be taken properly and fully to address the circumstances of this incident," he told MSPs at Holyrood.
"There has to be an investigation of this particular incident, properly and fully, by the Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) and that has to report. And as a consequence of that, it is incumbent - because this is what the law says - that the Civil Aviation Authority has to consider and apply any relevant changes to the safety regime as a consequence of the investigation carried out by the AAIB.
"The Government maintains the correct approach is to wait for the sequence of investigations to be undertaken before we come to any conclusion about the need for a wider inquiry."
Because many of the issues raised by such an inquiry are reserved to Westminster, the UK Government would also need to agree to this, Mr Swinney also said.
"We will consider any further inquiries that are required once the conclusions of the AAIB investigation are to hand."
Tory MSP Alex Johnston, who repesents the North East region, backed the Finance Secretary's approach.
"I believe he is correct in saying calls for a public inquiry are premature. The Air Accidents Investigation Branch is the correct facility for the initial inquiry," he said.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article