SCOTLAND'S state-controlled ferry owners have hit back at a users group's accusation of a 'deceptive and biased' procurement process in wake of award of a £105m deal to build two new lifeline vessels in Turkey.
The Mull and Iona Ferry Committee said that Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd (Cmal), which also procures new vessels, should have ordered four smaller ships rather than two large vessels for the Kintyre to Islay route.
The deal to give Cemre Marin Endustri the ferries deal would increase vehicle and freight capacity on the Islay routes by 40% with each vessel able to carry 100 cars and 450 passengers.
The report claimed CMAL ran a "deceptive, biased and pre-judged" options appraisal that has resulted in much more expensive vessels and a poorer service for islanders”.
The committee said that in the Islay ferries commission there were a "succession of deceptive errors and omissions intended to favour" larger vessels rather than smaller ones.
And it talked of a "shocking example" of a Norwegian ferry, of similar size and capacity being built in the same shipyard and at the same time, that will cost approximately half that of the CMAL vessel.
But CMAL said the investigation was "highly misleading" and contained a "narrative that is patently wrong".
It said that drawing comparisons between the Islay vessels and a Norwegian vessel order was an "entirely flawed approach, and one which demonstrates a profound lack of understanding of the technical aspects of ship design and shipbuilding".
They said that each Islay vessel will cost £45m, while the Norwegian one is a reported £32.5m.
Joe Reade, the chairman of the ferry committee, had said there was worry that the decision to opt for large ships could be repeated when Mull’s main ferry is replaced.
“As we approach the replacement of our own MV Isle of Mull there is understandable concern on our islands that Cmal’s preference for large ferry cruise liners, will be repeated,” Mr Reade said.
Buying several smaller vessels instead would have enabled more frequent sailings and averted disruption from harbour upgrades, he claimed. That option would also mean other ferries not having to be deployed from other routes during vessel maintenance, which would reduce disruption to the wider ferry network.
“CMAL opted to replace it [an Islay ferry] with one large ship, but then went on to decide to replace both Islay vessels,” he said. “The alternative, which we believe would have been better on all counts, would have been to replace each Islay ferry with two small ferries, so four in total. Their options appraisal appears to be quite deliberately skewed against the best choice, which was to opt for smaller ferries but more of them.”
But CMAL said therer were a range of different specifications required for the Islay vessels, such as extra power to operate in the open sea.
"It is important that we address misinformation and misleading statements from individuals and sources, who to the best of our knowledge do not have the relevant technical and professional knowledge, qualifications, skills and experience and are not in possession of all the facts. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. We deal in facts, not opinion. We are not in the business of deception or wasting Scottish taxpayers’ money," a CMAL spokesman said.
The Scottish government said: “We are confident CMAL has carried out a robust procurement process.”
The Cemre Marin Endustri shipyard
The Islay route is already one of the busiest services for freight on the Clyde and Hebrides network, and CMAL says that the incoming ferries will support the island’s vital economic activity.
Four shortlisted shipyards were asked to submit their technical and commercial proposals for the design and construction of the two vessels.
The successful initial bids were from Damen Shipyard in Romania, Remontowa Shipbuilding in Poland, and Turkish shipyards Sefine Denizcilik Tersanecilik Turizm, and Cemre Marin Endustri.
But it was confirmed Ferguson Marine embarked in a bid for the contract through the initial Pre-Qualification Questionnaire process but failed to make the shortlist.
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