Dunoon to Gourock Ferry Service
The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S4M-07597, in the name of David Stewart, on the Dunoon-Gourock ferry action group. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament supports the work of the Dunoon-Gourock Ferry Action Group (DGFAG), which aims to improve ferry services; understands that the DGFAG was formed on 24 November 2011 as a result of the strength of feeling in the community about the service; notes that its mission statement is to get the Scottish Government to deliver a frequent, safe, reliable, vehicle and passenger ferry service between Dunoon town centre and Gourock; understands that the DGFAG considers the current service to be inadequate; notes that it aims to lobby the Parliament on 19 September 2013 and believes that this will give members an opportunity to speak to the DGFAG about its concerns, and notes calls for the Scottish Government to take further steps to secure a passenger and vehicle ferry between Dunoon and Gourock.
12:34
This is an important debate for Argyll and Bute and beyond, and I appreciate MSPs’ attendance in the chamber. I thank the members who have signed my motion. For those who have not done so, of course I always welcome sinners who wish to repent.
This is not a debate about any old ferry crossing; it is about students getting to college, teachers commuting to schools and retired farmers getting to hospital.
As members will know, earlier today the Dunoon-Gourock ferry action group braved the elements to campaign outside Parliament, and had the opportunity to meet MSPs. They want to ensure that there is a suitable service on this vital lifeline route. I welcome the group to Parliament, in their vantage point in committee room 5, and I thank the group’s chairperson, Susanna Rice, and Professor Neil Kay and Ronnie Smith who have helped and advised me on ferry matters for many years—as they would, of course, help all MSPs, irrespective of political complexion.
Following the meeting of the DGFAG earlier today, it is clear to me that the deep feeling in the community that led to the formation of the group in November 2011 is as strong today as it was then. I had the privilege of attending and speaking at one of the action group’s first organised public meetings in Dunoon, which attracted 550 local residents. Who says that public meetings are dead? I shared a platform with Mike Russell on an evening of heavy showers and storms when both ferry services were off, so we both had to drive via the Rest and be Thankful, which is a misnomer if there ever was one. I was struck by the passion, engagement and, indeed, anger of local residents about the failure of ferry services. Following its inception, the group settled on a mission statement calling on the Scottish Government to deliver a frequent, safe and reliable vehicle and passenger ferry service between Dunoon town centre and Gourock rail terminal.
The Gourock-Dunoon route even has its own historians who know every nuance of the Deloitte & Touche report, “Options for the Future of Ferry Services between Gourock and Dunoon”, which is the holy grail and the genesis of this debate, but an ordinary Dunoon-Gourock commuter does not have to read the report to know that the service is inadequate. Alex Neil described the MV Ali Cat, one of the boats on the service, as “not fit for purpose”.
In the chamber today, however, we know that the Dunoon-Gourock service involves much more than going from A to B. It is much more than a simple transport system and entails much more than interpretations of some obscure maritime cabotage regulation. It concerns a community’s sense of identity, economic regeneration, and freedom to access jobs, health services and leisure.
Where do we go from here? In the brief time that is available I will not rehash the chequered, confused and sometimes conflicted history of the Gourock-Dunoon ferry services, which is well-documented in the excellent Dunoon Observer and Argyllshire Standard, which is represented here today.
I congratulate the member on getting a debate on the Dunoon-Gourock ferry service. The only reason why I did not sign the motion is that ministers do not sign back-bench members’ motions.
The success of the campaign for a reliable commuting route, which I thoroughly support, has always depended, and will depend, on the parties and communities working with the press and others. The work that Mr Stewart and I have tried to do together is part of the foundation of that campaign, as should be the case across this chamber.
It is important that we work with community groups and all political parties to try to achieve a solution to the problem.
MVA Consultancy’s report, which was published in June for Transport Scotland, states:
“Given the assumptions made here, a passenger and vehicle ferry service would be feasible under a two vessel scenario. It could attract the level of market share, and therefore generate sufficient incremental revenue, to cover the various incremental costs of delivering the service.”
In my view we need Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd to provide two purpose-built vessels that have been engineered for the crossing, and to consult the local communities on what they want in terms of on-board facilities. That would take between 18 months and two years according to CMAL. Vessels should, of course, be capable of carrying cars, but no cross-subsidisation would be allowed; it is not permitted under EU regulations.
In the event of Argyll Ferries not winning the next tender, vessels should go to the successful bidder, as happened when Serco won the NorthLink Ferries contract. The EU ruled that there could be a vehicle service on the route and that the Government could provide the vessels with service and require all bidders to use the supplied vessels, even if some of the bidders had vessels that would be cheaper.
There could also be a short-term option: to use the MV Coruisk as a temporary measure. That option was highlighted to me when I met the ferry action group in the Queen’s hall in Dunoon recently. The MV Coruisk is a relief vessel in the winter; it takes cars and was used on the route in 2004. The Cabinet Secretary for Infrastructure, Investment and Cities may wish to refer to that in her response.
Another aspect to consider is that if we go ahead with two new-build hybrid vessels that use diesel and electricity, it might be possible to access the 2014 structural funds programme to partly fund the build, in the context of the low-carbon economy. Perhaps the cabinet secretary will agree to explore that with her officials.
The strength of Argyll and Bute communities is their resilience. I spoke recently to Dunoon lawyer Euan Macdonald, who described how the local area fought back when the United States Navy pulled out of the Holy Loch. Local activists rallied, campaigned and knocked together the heads of politicians until they developed a sensible and practical new option, which provided diversification and new jobs in the area. We need to reinvent that can-do attitude. A solution can be found, with two new vessels that are custom built for the crossing and are capable of taking cars. The time is right to think again. Argyll and Bute deserves better. Second best is not enough. Let me rehash an old political slogan: two boats or no votes.
12:40
I declare that my wife works for Caledonian MacBrayne. She is based in Gourock.
I commend David Stewart for bringing the debate to Parliament. I have never changed my opinion on the Gourock-Dunoon ferry route; for the record, I say that I would like a return to a vehicle and passenger ferry on the route, which is the solution that many people have been campaigning for for some time. I recognise that the process is not easy.
My colleague Mike Russell MSP has been, and I am sure will continue to be, a strong voice in the campaign for a return to a passenger and vehicle ferry on the route. He is the member for the Argyll and Bute constituency, so I am sure that his support will be important as the campaign progresses.
I want a return to a passenger and vehicle ferry on the route for a number of reasons. It would provide town centre to town centre vehicle access and it would provide competition on the Clyde. I am sure that it would also have an environmental benefit, given that carbon emissions in Gourock would be reduced if vehicles did not have to go through the town to reach the Western Ferries route. I am also sure that the bigger ferry that would be required for the route would be more reliable and efficient. The current vessels are not perfect and it is clear that the MV Ali Cat is not reliable, particularly in the harsher months.
A vehicle and passenger ferry would bring economic benefits to both sides of the River Clyde. There might be an opportunity for a new ferry to operate on the route. Whether we were to get one ferry or more than one, as David Stewart proposed, and whether the new ferry was second hand or new, there would be advantages. The building of a new ferry or ferries would present opportunities for Clyde-based shipbuilders and others to tender for the work, which would bring even more economic benefits to West Scotland.
I appreciate that we must, as well as addressing the longer-term issue of returning a vehicle and passenger ferry to the route, address the short-term matter of the MV Ali Cat’s unreliability. In the longer term, we must also address the issue to do with the EU, which has been going on for many years. In recent years there has at least been some movement to try to deal with the issue; in the past it has been sidelined and never fully taken on.
I commend the hard work, dedication and determination of all the campaigners who care so much about the route. In particular, I thank the members of the Dunoon-Gourock ferry action group, whose drive and focus are helping to progress the issue. I also thank the current cabinet secretary and her predecessor Alex Neil for ensuring that dialogue on the issue has continued, and for attempting to find short-term and longer-term solutions for the Gourock-Dunoon route.
12:43
I congratulate David Stewart on securing the debate and I welcome constituents from the Dunoon-Gourock ferry action group to Parliament. They are to be commended for their efforts to highlight genuine and strongly felt local concerns, and for continuing to press the Scottish Government. A member of the group said to me today, “The town of Dunoon is dying, and it’ll die quicker without a regular town centre ferry service.” No one should forget that Dunoon is a gateway to the Highlands and to the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs national park.
I note from the motion that the DGFAG was formed in 2011, although I know that the strength of feeling goes back much further than that, including to a packed meeting—one of many—in the Queen’s hall in Dunoon during the first session of Parliament, when Labour’s own Sarah Boyack was Minister for Transport. She talked then about an integrated transport policy that included ferry, rail and road.
Ferries have quite rightly always been a hot potato in Dunoon. A new Forth road bridge is being built with public money—well done—but there is no chance of that on the Clyde, so adequate and reliable ferries are the next best option. The Scottish National Party promised that we would have them. I was there; I vividly remember the run up to the 2007 Scottish Parliament elections, when the then SNP candidate and subsequent constituency MSP for Argyll and Bute, Jim Mather—a very fine man—promised that there would be two new vehicle ferries on the town centre to town centre Gourock-Dunoon route. Local people know only too well that that promise was not fulfilled, as excuse after excuse was made and not even a rowing boat appeared. Instead, since July 2011, the service has been reduced to the Argyll Ferries passenger-only vessel.
As David Stewart said, local residents and visitors have understandably been angry and dismayed at the performance of Argyll Ferries, especially in bad weather, and the suitability of the vessels remains a big concern. The most recent figures that I obtained this week through a written answer demonstrate how poor performance is compared to Caledonian MacBrayne services. I know those other services very well because I use them often. Given that the Argyll Ferries contract is due to continue until June 2017, achievement of reliability on the route must be the key and immediate priority. Also, because the Argyll Ferries services are subsidised by the taxpayer, ministers ultimately have a duty to ensure their reliability, which is the very least that local commuters and visitors deserve. The 32 per cent cancellation rate of Argyll Ferries sailings in March this year was simply not acceptable.
CalMac’s record elsewhere is so good, so we must assume that Argyll Ferries’ poor record is due to the wrong type of vessel being used. I understand the desire to be connected directly to Gourock railway station, although arrangements in the stations could also be improved. I also understand that the Government said that the vehicle service that has been taken away could be profitable.
Despite being let down by successive Scottish Governments over the town centre to town centre service, the residents of Dunoon and Cowal have, thankfully, been well served for the past 40 years by the alternative Western Ferries passenger and vehicle service, which is frequent, reliable and affordable. Its fares are cheaper than those on the subsidised service, but it receives not one penny of subsidy from the taxpayer. I am delighted that Western Ferries will soon have two brand new British-built vessels on the route—the MV Sound of Seil and the MV Sound of Soay—which will further increase Western Ferries’ capacity and already exemplary reliability record. That demonstrates the company’s commitment to the communities that it serves.
Before the removal of the subsidised vehicle-service town centre route in 2011, Western Ferries was carrying the majority of vehicles between Gourock and the Cowal peninsula. There is a good connecting bus service from Dunoon to Glasgow via Western Ferries, but it does not go to the railhead. I recognise that the DGFAG is continuing to campaign for a reinstated vehicle and passenger service on the town centre route.
I note that the Scottish Government’s feasibility study has suggested that a vehicle and state-subsidised passenger service on the town centre route could be feasible, although many ferry industry operators remain sceptical about that. It is therefore for the Scottish Government to set out in detail on what basis such a ferry service could be feasible, and how it would comply with EU regulations on competition. If the vehicle service made a profit, that would satisfy the EU.
How much of the extra capital funding that is allocated for ferries in 2015-16 is specifically for the Dunoon-Gourock route? I look forward to hearing what the minister has to say on that subject.
12:49
I also congratulate David Stewart on securing the debate. It is extremely important that it has come to Parliament. I also pay tribute to the DGFAG for its tenacity. Its members have been campaigning for many years, and I am glad that they are in Parliament today to flag up their campaign. They have not only been pushing people; they have also been looking for solutions. Tribute needs to be paid to them for that.
I was in Dunoon recently and saw the MV Ali Cat coming in. I decided to go down to the pier to watch it berth. That was just out of interest; it was something to do because it was a lovely day for a walk. As I watched it come in, the nub of the problem was brought home to me; even on such a beautiful day, the gangway was moving in a way that we would expect a seesaw to move. It went up and down so much that I do not know how the people getting on and off the ferry were keeping their feet. Mums with buggies were not able to hold on to the gangway because they had to hold on to the children in their buggies. I cannot imagine the bravery of the older people who were trying to get on and off that boat. There were also people with bags of shopping, luggage and the like. It looked horrendous.
I am just not clear how any health and safety risk assessment could have allowed that ferry to sail, even in those conditions, as people must be able to get on and off safely. That needs to be looked at as a matter of urgency. Obviously such difficulties in getting on and off a ferry discourage people from using it, which will impact on jobs in the tourism industry. It will discourage people who might have been looking to come to Dunoon to create a business and to commute back and forth.
There is also the problem of the Rest and Be Thankful—the other route into Dunoon, which is longer. Last winter the road was closed on numerous occasions because of landslides, which would have cut Dunoon off had it not been for Western Ferries. People who do not have cars are least well served by the service, which is an equality issue. Those who cannot afford cars and so cannot drive to Western Ferries do not have the opportunity to look for jobs on the other side.
When I spoke to people in Dunoon I was told that young people who commute town centre to town centre for work have found that their employers have lost patience with them, because they were not turning up to work when they should because the ferry could not sail. Some of the problems that I referred to earlier arise when the ferry is sailing, but there are also difficulties for people who cannot get to work when the ferry does not sail—it is unreliable.
I also heard anecdotal accounts of people having to lie on the floor on the ferry and of people being thrown about, which was a terrifying experience. All that adds up to a lack of confidence in the service. Issues need to be addressed very quickly. We have heard warm words from the Government, but what we really need is action. The solution is in the Government’s hands. I hope that when the minister winds up we will hear her view of what that solution could be.
12:52
I am grateful to Dave Stewart for securing the debate as it gives me the opportunity to update members on our work with the ferry action group and others to bring about improvements, which are undoubtedly needed, to the Gourock-Dunoon ferry service. I thank the ferry action group members for the work that they do and I welcome them to the Scottish Parliament.
I am also very grateful to my colleague Mike Russell, the constituency MSP for Argyll and Bute, who has been absolutely assiduous in representing the interests of his constituents on the issue. Since I took on responsibility for the matter he has ensured that I am in no doubt whatever of the implications for his constituents of the problems that are experienced on the passenger service. I thought that Dave Stewart summed up those implications and the importance of the service very well in his opening remarks. Mike Russell has also ensured that I understand the strong local desire for restoration of a passenger and vehicle service on the town centre route, if that can be achieved. I thank Mike Russell for all that.
The service has a long history, which has led to the situation that we have heard described today. I do not think that there is anything to be gained by my trying to apportion blame for what has happened in the past. In the 12 months since I took on responsibility for the work, I have tried very much to focus on seeking lasting solutions, and have encouraged others to do the same. My predecessor, Alex Neil, established the Gourock-Dunoon ferry services steering group; of course, the action group has been an active member of that steering group, alongside Argyll and Bute Council and Inverclyde Council. I very much welcome the local knowledge and vital user experience that the action group brings to the discussions that we have.
The shortcomings of the current service are well documented. The weather reliability statistics, particularly for last winter, tell a very clear story. However, I stress that the situation is in no way the fault of the crews of Argyll Ferries’ vessels, who strive to provide the best possible service under the understandably very close scrutiny of the users of the service. The hard fact is that the vessels—in particular the MV Ali Cat—have failed to perform reliably in poor weather.
I am sure that there were a lot of warnings that the Ali Cat was not going to be a good enough vessel, so why was it progressed with?
I am more than happy to discuss such issues with anybody, but in the time that is available to me here I want to focus on the future and what we are doing to try to fix things. That is the approach that I have brought to the issue and I hope that Jamie McGrigor will forgive me if I focus on that in my speech. However, conversations about the other issues are had regularly, as I am sure he is aware.
I was talking about weather reliability. Given our prevailing Scottish weather, ferry services can be, and often are, affected by conditions, but the level of disruption last winter on the Dunoon-Gourock route was simply unacceptable. I have no hesitation in saying that. New vessels are needed, but to date we have not been able to source suitable replacement vessels from the market.
I have been exploring short-term options and can today propose two specific changes. First, following a proposal from the action group, Argyll Ferries has looked into making the more reliable MV Argyll Flyer the lead vessel, connecting with the fast trains from Gourock to Glasgow. Argyll Ferries is now ready to make that happen.
Secondly, I have been considering the options for the coming winter based on the vessels that are available in the wider CalMac fleet. Following consultation with Argyll Ferries and very careful consideration of the issues, I announce to Parliament today that I intend to approve the deployment of the MV Coruisk, when she becomes available this winter, to carry passengers on key peak sailings and to be on stand-by at other times. I stress to Parliament that the operational details of that must be finalised, but nevertheless I hope that my confirmation today will come as welcome news to the local people concerned.
This is the first time I have intervened from the front bench.
My constituents will greatly welcome the Coruisk on the Dunoon-Gourock route. I presume that the operator will monitor the performance of the Argyll Flyer and the Coruisk in terms of reliability and keeping to the timetable so that we can avoid the difficulties of the previous winter.
Yes. I can give an assurance that that will be the case.
In the time that remains to me, I will turn to the longer term, because obviously short-term solutions are only part of the story. Our stated policy objective is to provide
“a safe, reliable, frequent, commuter ferry service between Dunoon town centre and the rail terminal at Gourock”.
In addition, as we have said previously, our wish, like that of the action group, is that the service carry vehicles as well as passengers. During the European Commission’s investigation that concluded in 2009, we argued for the continuation of a subsidised town centre service. However, the existence of an unsubsidised service provided by Western Ferries persuaded the Commission that there was no public service need for a subsidised vehicle ferry service on the town centre route. That said, we were able to demonstrate to the Commission that there was a clear public service need for a subsidised passenger service and, furthermore, that the operator of the service could also carry vehicles at their own commercial risk. The Commission has recently reconfirmed those points to my officials. However frustrated members across the chamber might sometimes be by decisions like that, I hope and expect that everybody understands that we must comply with Commission rules and play by them.
We commissioned a study into the feasibility of providing a vehicle and passenger ferry service with only the passenger-carrying element receiving subsidy. Although Dave Stewart referred to the study in his opening speech, he did not point out that the study found that by using optimal passenger vessels a high level of reliability could be achieved, albeit with an increased subsidy. Dave Stewart did say, however, that the study also found that a vehicle-carrying service would be commercially viable if it received that same increased passenger subsidy. Therefore, we can achieve our objective of a safe, reliable and frequent commuter ferry service.
I thank the cabinet secretary for her comments about the Coruisk. As I highlighted in my speech, I am delighted that the Government is looking at that option. Just in case the cabinet secretary does not have time to discuss the longer term, if the Government is looking at purchasing two new vessels, will she ask her officials to look at the use of structural funds and see whether they can be provided, particularly for hybrid vessels? I believe that there are opportunities there that would reduce the cost to Government.
I am happy to ask my officials to look at all the suggestions that have been made during the debate.
I finish by stating the Government’s intention, following publication of the MVA Consultancy report, to go forward and explore the potential for an operator that is prepared to take the commercial decision to provide a vehicle service. The operator would have to be able to demonstrate to the Commission that no subsidy that was paid for passengers was distorting competition with Western Ferries for carriage of vehicles. However, my officials will engage with potential operators to test that commercial interest, and the steering group will have a role in that. I note the idea of a community enterprise company, which is also worthy of further exploration.
Once I have received and considered the feedback that we get from the exercise, I will be able to consult the steering group on the options and next steps. I would very much like those discussions to be completed this year so that we are able to move forward decisively and get on with putting in place the service that the people of Cowal and Dunoon need and deserve.
I hope that that has been a useful update on the work that the Government is doing. I also hope that the announcements that I made today for the short term will be welcomed, and that I have also managed to demonstrate the Government’s commitment to ensuring that we do the right things for the long term to give local people the service that they deserve.
13:01
Meeting suspended.
14:30
On resuming—