FINANCE secretary Kate Forbes has insisted she "fundamentally disagrees" the decision to award a botched ferry contract to Ferguson Marine was made for political gain.
Jim McColl, the former boss of the Port Glasgow shipyard who was handed the contract, told the Sunday Times the decision was made for "political purposes" and “everything was about the optics and timing the announcements for political gain”.
McColl was a former adviser to the Scottish Government and a passionate supporter of independence.
But during a BBC interview this morning, Forbes rubbished this claim and said the Government should be basing its learnings purely on the Audit Scotland report.
Forbes said on Good Morning Scotland: “I fundamentally disagree with that.
READ MORE: Lash Fary defends Highlands title Oscars gimmick gift
“If we’re serious about learning the lessons of this whole situation, we [should] base that analysis on facts – on the independent Audit Scotland report – and not the opinion of someone who has a vested interest in a Sunday newspaper.”
She did not confirm what "vested interest" McColl may have.
The report published last week said the contracts for the CalMac vessels - called Glen Sannox and Hull 802 - were given the green light despite not having full refund guarantees.
McColl said the decision to overrule concerns from the Government-owned ferry procurer Caledonian Maritime Assets Limited (CMAL) was made by former finance secretary Derek Mackay and Nicola Sturgeon.
Forbes went on to say the “timetable does not stack up”.
“Ferguson was publicly announced as the preferred bidder in August 2015," she added.
“I think the conference you’re referring to was some time in October. The election wasn’t until the following May and this whole process was months, if not years, in the making.”
Last week, Sturgeon also suggested Mackay – who resigned from the government in 2020 – was at fault for the decision to award the contract to McColl.
However, the First Minister insisted the "buck stops with me".
Forbes announced a further delay to the ferries last week and increased cost.
During the interview, she also addressed McColl's assertion the cost for the two ferries could top £400 million.
“Jim McColl may say a lot of things,” she said. “I prefer to base my analysis and my forecast on the facts.
“The latest updated cost forecast is up to £206 million. That takes into account new warranties, the latest schedule, and the cabling issue that I’ve already referred to.
“I have no idea what he has based that on."
It was found on Christmas Eve that some of the electrical cable coils on one vessel were too short to reach equipment.
McColl claimed the Scottish Government would be better off making Hull 802 – the second ferry due to be delivered – watertight in its current form and selling it off before starting a new ferry entirely.
Forbes said that if the Port Glasgow shipyard was not awarded the contract, it could have collapsed into administration.
“If we pulled the plug on that contract at that point, we wouldn’t have proceeded with those two vessels and the yard, of course, would probably have gone into administration,” she said.
The yard fell into administration in 2019 before being saved by the Scottish Government. Cost overruns and delays were revealed by Mackay in December of that year.
The Tories have called on Sturgeon to appear before the Scottish Parliament on Tuesday to answer the claims from McColl.
Conservative shadow transport minister, Graham Simpson, said: “It was truly cringeworthy to hear Kate Forbes try to dodge responsibility and claim that the problem with the ferries was only the construction, and nothing to do with the government contracts that arranged the construction.
“She seems to be suggesting there were no flaws in a procurement process that has so far cost Scottish taxpayers £250 million while failing to deliver any ferries.
“This is the worst political spin the SNP have come out with in years.
“Nicola Sturgeon must urgently appear before the Scottish Parliament to respond to Jim McColl’s claims this contract was personally signed off by her for political purposes.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel