Ferries: setting the record straight

IN the last few days we have had the good fortune to witness the contrasting performances of the two leading ministers in their own parliaments.

Let me say at the outset that I have no truck with either of their parties and policies which define their DNA.

On performance alone, we have one with a guid conceit of himself and the other with a commanding and realistic outlook on the way out of lockdown.

Apparently, the leader of the house in the Westminster Parliament is intent on bringing back the baying hounds of the Government’s backbenchers to give the PM the succour he apparently needs to deliver his shallow grasp of detail and his puffed-up promises in the face of a leader of the opposition who is master of his brief and tenacious with it.

Holyrood’s FM presented her way out of lockdown in a calm, clear and concise manner in a delivery constrained by an emphasis upon the uncertainties ahead.

This contrasted well with both the bluster of Boris and her own unduly protective defence of the Covid outbreak at the Nike conference in Edinburgh, which did her no favours, it being another example of a politician desperate to camouflage her fallibility when deep down politicians view themselves as infallible and untouchable.

Nicola’s careful and considered performance struck the right note of caution and gave her audience both comfort and confidence that no rash steps will be taken to jeopardise the health of our nation whereas Boris made yet another exaggerated promise to have full TTI up and running by June 1, which certainly left me shaking my head at his hubristic hyperbole.

Of the two, my money would be on Nicola to inspire the trust of the nation with regard to exiting lockdown sensibly rather than on Boris who is setting himself up to defy all the odds on Covid19 and the delivery of Brexit without compromise.

Denis Bruce Bishopbriggs

I HAVE read with interest several letters in these pages in recent weeks discussing the dual-fuel ferry contract, and I wish to address a few points.

Lifeline ferry services are vital and people are, rightly, vocal about current and future infrastructure. Opinions are always welcome, but it is important to maintain the facts.

The Programme Review Board set up by the Scottish Government estimated the cost to complete the ferries, including remedial work and capital expenditure in the shipyard, at £110.3 million. That figure is unchanged.

Obscure calculations reaching “half a billion pounds” (It’s time to admit defeat on these ferries and start again from scratch, The Herald on Sunday, April 26) are wildly inaccurate.

It is misleading to conflate investment in harbours with the cost of the dualfuel ferries.

Several ferry terminals have either reached or are nearing life expiry. Certainly, upgrades will directly benefit the arrival of the dual-fuel ferries, but the harbour work is vital regardless of the vessel build programme.

Scrapping the dual-fuel vessels is not the solution. The Scottish Government has committed to maintaining shipbuilding on the Clyde and the hundreds of jobs and the businesses supported by it. They have committed to completing the two dual-fuel ferries and a future for the shipyard.

To start from scratch would begin a four-year process and that is time we do not have when island communities desperately await new ferries.

As an organisation with decades of shipbuilding experience among the team, we are deeply dismayed by the extensive time and cost overruns. The agreed contract price of £97m and delivery timescales are comparable with LNG vessels built around the world and should have been achieved.

It is important to remember a privatesector shipyard, contractually committed to design and build the two dual-fuel ferries, failed to deliver. Kevin Hobbs

Chief Executive Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd (CMAL)

This issue is, for the time being, closed. – Ed

We couldn’t agree more. We would encourage anyone who has an opinion on something they read in The Herald on Sunday – or on current events – to send us a letter. The greater the diversity of contributions we get, the more we will be able to bring you the interesting and engaging letters pages you have come to expect. – Ed