SCOTLAND’s biggest port operator has been accused of “sacrificing” the Clyde to protect the Mersey as the two great rivers compete for vital harbour and shipyard work.
Peel Ports – which owns and manages swathes of land along the West Coast – have always denied favouring their substantial holdings in England.
Now a campaign questioning the concern’s monopoly over both the Clyde and the Mersey has been endorsed by politicians from the SNP, Labour and Green parties.
Campaigners allege Peel Ports are letting key pieces of infrastructure lie idle that could help Scotland compete for shipyard and port jobs with north-west England.
Peel Ports dismiss this claim and point to investments approaching £900m on the Clyde in the last two decades.
The row comes amid a long-standing conflict between two multi-millionaire tax exiles over one of the biggest marine assets on the British coast: Inchgreen Dry Dock in Inverclyde.
Three years ago this newspaper revealed one tycoon – Jim McColl of Ferguson Marine, Scotland’s last commercial shipbuilder– wanted to lease the 1000ft long facility from another, John Whittaker of Peel Ports.
The Save the Inchgreen Campaign, in a letter sent yesterday to First Minister Nicola Sturgeon and MPs and MSPs across Western Scotland, said: “We believe Inchgreen Dry Dock is being sacrificed to protect The Peel Group’s Investments on Merseyside.
“The Peel Group acquired vast areas of industrial land from Glasgow to Ayrshire when they bought Clydeport in 2002. They are now cashing in on that purchase by building thousands of houses and major retail
complexes, but no industrial development. We question whether this breaks monopoly rules.”
The letter was endorsed by MPs and MSPs from the SNP, Labour and Green parties and by the
STUC, including local Inverclyde nationalists Stuart McMillan and Ronnie Cowan.
Glasgow North-East Labour MP and former shipbuilder Paul Sweeney has long championed a major world-class shipyard at Inchgreen, which would cost at least £200m to build from scratch.
Jim McColl
Mr McColl’s yard, Ferguson Marine in nearby Port Glasgow, is currently struggling with a Scottish Government order for two new high-tech ferries for CalMac.
The tycoon had wanted to move to the roomier Inchgreen but failed to come to agreement with Peel Ports, which now runs the facility through its Mersey shipyard, Cammell Laird.
Critics say Peel Ports and Cammell Laird have had a decade and a half to outline long-term plans for
Inchgreen and other potential shipyard and harbour sites.
The concern has been piling money into the Clyde – but mostly on housing schemes such as Glasgow Harbour.
Now, aware of simmering discontent, it has announced that it will bid for the right to turn Inchgreen into a repair yard for the Royal Navy’s two giant aircraft carriers.
Ferguson Marine
That, the firm says, will mean jobs. Insiders expect a charm campaign to get Clydeside politicians on side.
Save Inchgreen’s Robert Buirds has also highlighted other opportunities on the Clyde for ship repairs, including central Glasgow’s historic graving docks.
A spokesman for Peel said: “We wrote to Mr Buirds a few months ago detailing how the £874 million Peel has invested in Scotland over the past decade has helped create more than 5,400 Scottish jobs.
“Mr Buirds chooses to ignore that we are actively bidding for the refit work for the new Royal Navy carriers and have pledged that, if successful, this would be located at the Inchgreen Dry Dock.
“That would create significant numbers of local, skilled manufacturing jobs. Peel has a proud track record of investment on the Clyde, from the £200m Glasgow Harbour
development and the major redevelopment work at Greenock Ocean Terminal, which was voted the top mainland UK cruise destination, to our plans for the Hunterston Deep Water Terminal and the creation of new ports and visitors facilities at Ardrossan Harbour.
“We remain committed to working to ensure that the Clyde plays its rightful role in the economic future of Scotland.”
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel