Pentland ferries could show CMAL way to go

Sir, – According to the assertion by Mr Hobbs “Ferry woes could take till 2030 to put right says chief ”, P&J April 4, this is undoubtedly correct, but only if CMAL continues to pursue current policies.

There is another way, as proven by the undoubted success of Pentland Ferries which has opted to use catamarans for the past 15 years.

That they have shown the way forward is being studiously ignored by CMAL, at great cost to the taxpayer.

With this example, virtually on the doorstep, one would expect that CMAL would be excited to assess the potential.

Unbelievably, when some two years ago I made an FOI request for information on any reports or assessments carried out, I was told, almost with pride, that there were none.

This does not smack of seeking to maximise the use of our money.

Such was the success of “Pentalina” it quickly became apparent that more capacity was required.

The 98-car “Alfred” was commissioned for a cost variously being quoted as between £14million and £17 million with a lead time of some 17 months.

Compare this with “Glen Sannox” and hull 802 with an indeterminate lead time and cost. Any vessel which can operate on the notorious Pentland Firth route with very few cancellations is eminently suitable for Calmac routes.

Excellent sea keeping combined with superb manoeuverability and shallow draught lends itself to coping with difficult sea conditions and the ability to access and berth in confined harbours, of which there are many – Ardrossan being, perhaps, one of the more problematic.

I have family connections in Arran and my last four attempts to access the island have been disrupted.

The service offered to Arran, Mull and the Minch triangle has been nothing short of appalling in recent years with all requests for more frequent, smaller ferries being ignored.

The profligacy of CMAL is exposed when the Turkish yard selected to build the two new Islay ferries, where three are really required, is building two all-electric more eco-friendly ferries for Norway of similar size for half the price.

If it is possible to build two-and-a-half or three catamarans for the cost of one CMAL-designed mono hull, it need not take a further eight years to modernise the fleet.

Half the time would suffice with the offered funding. There is not, as claimed by Mr Hobbs, a shortage of money, rather it is how it is used.

Furthermore, the oversized craft, as ordered by CMAL, necessitate very extensive infrastructure works at many harbours, few of which would be required for the shorter, shallower and more manoeuverable catamarans. The difficulty in handling these large mono hulls in confined harbours will result in many more cancelled sailings.

If you really wish to know the extent to which CMAL may have attempted to skew the argument against catamarans, check out the “Mull and Iona Ferry Committee” website. If true, the assertions made therein are an exposé of a shocking waste of taxpayers’ money in designing an unsuitable vessel in a poor attempt to prove an untenable point which has been comprehensively proved by Pentland Ferries.

The parliamentary inquiry of some two or more years ago questioned the ability and relevance of CMAL, but nothing has changed except that the Ferry Advisory Committee has been disbanded.

I wonder why? The only point I can make in favour of CMAL is that they sought to discourage the government from proceeding with the FMEL contract without guarantees.

There is little else to commend and they appear to be backed to the hilt by our inept government without regard as to cost, this being at our expense.

WAIT: The Glen Sannox is still not ready for service.