Ferry Links
Item 3 is to consider an approach paper on an inquiry into ferry links to the islands. I seek members' comments.
I thank the clerks for the paper, which is helpful and lays out the position clearly. As members will be aware, we discussed the prospect of an inquiry into ferry links first at our away day and then at a couple of our most recent committee meetings. It was thought important to have a strong rural element to our committee's discussion and that either some or all committee members should go to Shetland, where there are the most difficulties in ferry transport, for a site visit.
I thought more about how we could ensure that any inquiry is representative. We should pick up the situation in the Western Isles and Arran, which has its unique problems. The clerks said that we could have a videoconference as part of our inquiry, but we cannot really do a ferries inquiry without going to the places that use ferries.
The paragraph on the terms of reference of the inquiry is comprehensive. I said in a question to the minister that one of the big issues with a road equivalent tariff is the problem with capacity. I support the principle of a road equivalent tariff. Of course we can increase demand—that is relatively easy—but the issue is how we create capacity.
We should perhaps consider the role of competition. I do not know whether other members agree, but I think that the inquiry should be about how we develop services for customers, islanders and people from elsewhere in Scotland and abroad. I do not see the inquiry as being about having a go at companies such as Caledonian MacBrayne and Western Ferries (Clyde) Ltd, which happen to be the developers of services. They have their role and I admire much of the work that they do.
There are problems, particularly in island communities, around the role that ferries have. They have a role in relation to tourism, cargo and the sustainability of rural communities. It is vital that we take information from the public. I agree with what the clerk said about that.
It will also be sensible to find out what the Government is doing. I strongly agree that there is no point in reinventing the wheel. However, I do not want this inquiry to go to sleep or, if I may mix my metaphors, be kicked into the long grass. The need for an inquiry is urgent.
The forthcoming legislation on climate change will be the biggest piece of Government legislation and it will keep us extremely busy when it comes up. I therefore worry that, if we miss the present window, it will be hard to carry out an inquiry into ferries.
I am enthusiastic about our approach paper. The question is whether we should all be involved in the inquiry, or whether it should be led by just one or two of us. I am open-minded about that. In either case, the clerks will be able to advise and guide us.
I take your point about asking the Government about its plans, as suggested in paragraph 12 of the paper. We are looking at a commitment in the national transport strategy to conduct a review. You are right to say that we do not want to reproduce work that is being done elsewhere, but if we get information about the scope and timescale of the Government's inquiry, that information might make us want to revise our plans and reconsider the extensive list of issues in paragraph 10.
I endorse what David Stewart said about the importance of including competition issues within the terms of reference. Regardless of how we feel about the way the ferry industry has gone, it would be difficult and perhaps dangerous for the Government to commit itself to a road equivalent tariff without having any idea of the true cost of ferry services. The Government is committed to running a road equivalent tariff pilot.
It is important to have a viable commercial industry. We should therefore look into the role of competition in the provision of ferry services, and look into how competition can be effectively supported. I am thinking, for example, about the division of quay space and about the ownership of ferries and the services that they provide. There is still no transparency in the way in which we work out how much it costs to run a ferry service.
A distinct look into Scotland's ferry services is overdue. For many years, that has not been done, except in the context of other, land-based means of travel. However, I take the convener's point that we do not necessarily want to duplicate work that the Government might be about to undertake.
Our approach paper says that we might want to consult on the detail of the remit of an inquiry. That would be sensible. However, it is a slight misuse of language for the paper to mention ferry services "to the Scottish Islands". In several places, the paper mentions other services, such as the Gourock to Dunoon service. Dunoon is not on an island but on a peninsula. However, it is fairly remote by road, which is why ferry services are significant. Any amended draft of the paper should take that into account.
I would be up for looking into ferry services, but first we have to satisfy ourselves as to the scope of the Government's approach.
I am happy with our approach paper; we should give it some priority. I am particularly interested in the programme or timetable. David Stewart raised the idea of using reporters, which I would support to a certain extent.
It is important that people who depend on ferries, and people who run them and work on them, should be able to give us their views. That could be done in some places through holding meetings that would be attended by a small number of committee members. It would also be worth while holding a full committee meeting in at least one or two places, to ensure that folk are aware of what the committee is doing and that we are able to hear and speak to local people about ferries. That might be difficult to organise, but it is important that we do not just sit in Edinburgh.
The thought occurred to me that it might be possible to hold a committee meeting on a ferry.
Absolutely—but on a calm day.
What is the prospect for webcasting from a ferry?
Do members agree to write to the Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change to request the information that is outlined in the paper and to consider the inquiry's remit following the receipt of the response? At that point, we could ask the clerks to sketch out the options for using reporters.
Members indicated agreement.
I ask the clerk what the process would be for consultation on the remit.
The paper suggests various methods for that, including arranging reporter meetings, using the standard approach of consultation exercise via the website and, perhaps, drafting leaflets to be distributed on ferries and to passenger groups throughout Scotland to try to identify the issues. The suggestion is that we use a variety of techniques to elicit views on the remit.
When the Environment and Rural Development Committee carried out an inquiry on accessible rural areas, members went to parts of Scotland other than those that they represented, so that they could pick up something new. For example, I went to Fife. There is nothing at all alien about Fife, but it was good to get into a different place from one that I was used to, as that sharpens the mind. I have antecedents from Fife, so I know how to sup with a long spoon. It would be good for our inquiry if the clerks considered such an approach, because it is a way of getting information from areas with fresh eyes.
That is helpful.
Are members comfortable with the clerks bringing back that information in the timescale that is sketched out and considering locations for external meetings, mobile or not?
Members indicated agreement.