Rosyth to Zeebrugge Ferry Service
The next item of business is a members' business debate on motion S3M-2014, in the name of John Park, on the Rosyth to Zeebrugge ferry service.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament is deeply disappointed to learn of Superfast Ferries' decision to end sailings from Rosyth to Zeebrugge from September 2008; recognises that the ferry link to Europe is vital to the Fife and Scottish economies; notes that the service has been a commercial success regularly operating at full capacity; is disappointed that Superfast does not plan to continue with sailings until an alternative operator is found, and hopes that an alternative operator can be found for this crucial ferry route.
I am grateful for the opportunity to raise this matter in Parliament but, obviously, my gratitude is tinged with sadness because, like many other members, I am disappointed that the debate is necessary.
The announcement by Superfast Ferries at the end of last month was a huge disappointment and a shock to many. I am pleased that the Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change is here today as it is important that we know exactly what happened in the weeks and months leading up to the announcement by the operator. It is crucial that we are told when the Government knew about the decision and what action it took. It is also important that we are told what steps it is taking now.
We should be in no doubt that getting the service to Rosyth in the first instance took a great deal of effort and persistence. As a union official in Rosyth dockyard, I met many key people while campaigning for the service and saw at first hand their hard work and dedication. [Interruption.]
Excuse me, Mr Park. I ask members of the public who are leaving the public gallery to do so quietly.
Thank you, Presiding Officer.
Although it is impossible to mention all those who were involved in the campaign to bring the ferry to Rosyth, it is important to acknowledge some of those who played a key part and to put their names on record. I start by paying tribute to the work that many politicians did on the matter, especially my good friend, the late Rachel Squire. Rachel is fondly remembered for her tireless campaigning on behalf of the workforce at the dockyard in Rosyth, but we must not forget that she also made a huge contribution to ensuring that Scotland gained a link to the continent. I would also like to mention Helen Eadie and Catherine Stihler, who worked tirelessly, often behind the scenes, in the Scottish Parliament and in Europe to make things happen.
The trade unions in Rosyth dockyard, with the support of the Scottish Trades Union Congress, also played a key role. They lobbied the likes of Dave Jamieson and John Spellar, who were ministers with responsibility for transport in Westminster at the time, to ensure that the freight facilities grant for short sea shipping would be available to assist the development of the service. On a lighter note, probably the most entertaining factor at the time was watching some of my former colleagues trying to say "short sea shipping" after a couple of pints at the dockyard social club.
I have mentioned a number of Labour members, but I know that the proposal for the ferry had support right across the political spectrum. It was during that period that I first came across Bruce Crawford, who I know vigorously supported the calls for a continental service from Rosyth and has supported improved transport links for the area ever since.
All that work paid off, and the service was delivered in 2002. Since then, Rosyth has been completely transformed from what it was in the 1980s and 1990s. Fifteen years ago, the dockyard lost the Trident refitting contract and, with it, thousands of jobs. Now, preparatory work is under way to support the construction of two new aircraft carriers, which will employ a generation of skilled workers. Thirteen years ago, the naval base closed and the minesweeper fleet sailed up the Forth for the last time. However, in 2008, we see new roads, finance companies and huge potential for development on the site.
Unfortunately, we are now witnessing a turn of events that could scupper the progress that has been made.
The ferry service is vital for Fife, as the Fife Chamber of Commerce—whose representatives are in the public gallery—well knows. In my meetings with the chamber of commerce, it constantly raises the issue on behalf of businesses in Fife. However, the service is also vital for the rest of Scotland, as the Confederation of British Industry Scotland recognises. In a recent press release about the ending of the operation, it said:
"As a nation on the periphery of major export markets in Europe it is crucial that Scotland maintains excellent transport links to the continent.
The Superfast ferry has made a significant contribution to this over recent years, and it would be a great loss if that service was to cease, as it would reduce the range of affordable, practical and reliable transport options open to freight operators and manufacturers."
One of the manufacturers that use the service is Michelin Tyre plc. The workforce at its Dundee factory and their trade union, Unite, campaigned when the service reduced from a sailing every day to a sailing on alternate days.
Members of the Parliament and businesses throughout Fife and beyond know that the service from Rosyth has, since 2002, provided a viable alternative to the ports in the north of England and beyond for heavy goods vehicles, thereby reducing the number of lorries on the roads, which is something that we all aim to do.
Where are we now? The preferred option would be for Superfast to stay in place until a new operator has been found. Will the minister confirm in his closing speech whether the Government explored that option? The second preference would be for an alternative operator to be found to replace Superfast in time to ensure that there is a seamless changeover. As I highlighted, discussions have been taking place and options are being explored with potential new operators, which is positive. The minister may not be at liberty to say much about those discussions, but I am sure that members would appreciate it if he could outline the next major milestones in the Government's efforts to secure the service.
We need to move forward. I made it clear that a statement from the Government on the matter would be helpful. Unfortunately, we did not get that, but I am pleased that the minister recognised the importance of the debate when he was before the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee recently.
I understand that fortnightly meetings are now under way between the Scottish Government, Forth Ports, Scottish Enterprise, specialist consultants and Fife Council to consider options for the future operation of the service. I also understand that that group's objective is to arrange a seamless continuation of the direct Rosyth to Zeebrugge return route and that work is under way to test the market to identify an operator and vessels for the run. I wish the group every success but stress the need to release Rosyth's full potential as an international port.
As the developing world becomes more globally connected, freight transport by sea will become one of the growth markets, and Scotland must be in a position to take advantage of that opportunity. That is why I wrote to the minister earlier this year to ask him to bring together an action team that would include smaller businesses in the area and other organisations that have an interest, such as Forth Ports, to consider the potential for developing Rosyth as a port. Such a group is even more important since the announcement last month. The existing group, which is considering the current situation, is undoubtedly reactive, but it is also welcome. However, a proactive group would make most sense for the future, and I would like the minister to support that concept.
I remind members that the service has been first class for Fife and first class for Scotland. It has enabled key sectors, such as tourism and freight transport, to grow—and we all know how important that is. Superfast has been clear that the service is a commercial success, albeit not a financial one for the company. As I read between the lines, that says to me that finding an operator that can run it efficiently should be the number 1 priority so that we do not find ourselves in the same situation in future. Today, the Parliament must send a clear message that Scotland is open for business, whether imports, exports or tourism.
I am grateful to John Park for securing the debate and was happy to support his motion. As former employees of Babcock International Group plc at Rosyth, he and I have a good understanding of the issues that affect the area and, as I am the constituency member for the Rosyth waterfront area, including the ferry terminal, the debate is close to my heart.
However, John Park made a slight oversight in his praise for the people who were involved in setting up the service. Although his praise was welcome, he forgot one person who was important in bringing the service to Rosyth: Tavish Scott, the then Minister for Transport.
Not only has the loss of the service had an adverse effect on Rosyth and local jobs in my constituency, but its effect on business and tourism throughout Scotland is potentially devastating. I am sure that many people were as shocked as I was by the suddenness of the recent announcement that Superfast is to withdraw its service from mid-September, particularly as it had received nearly £15 million of public money and provided an excellent service, which often operated at capacity and had to turn away business.
After the shock announcement, I sought assurances from Forth Ports on the job security of the affected employees, submitted 10 parliamentary questions seeking more details from the current minister and met him. I am grateful to him for arranging that meeting promptly and I hope that he will agree to my more recent request for another meeting to discuss updates on a possible new ferry service as well as other issues of importance to my constituency.
Continued joint working is crucial to securing a new provider that may not only continue the Rosyth to Zeebrugge service but, potentially, expand the services that are available to include a Scottish link to Norway. Therefore, I urge the minister to share information in the fortnightly talks that are under way involving Forth Ports, Fife Council, Scottish Enterprise and the specialist consultants. I also ask that he consider the views of the Flanders Government and seek its assistance with tourism and freight business in Brussels.
The potential loss of the Rosyth to Zeebrugge ferry service is a bitter disappointment not only to me, but to the Road Haulage Association. For many members of that association, the service has been a vital link for their businesses. If a service is not restored before September, hauliers and tourist travellers will have to drive much further south. The knock-on effects of that would include increased journey times and fuel costs, and there would be an adverse effect on the environment.
The Government's priority must be to provide a seamless transfer from Superfast to a new operator in mid-September. That is a big challenge, but I am sure that Stewart Stevenson is up for it. A key part of the challenge is to identify an operator and the vessels that are required for the route. Can the minister tell us any more about progress on that? For example, can he tell us about the level of interest that potential operators have shown in the route?
The service was running to capacity, which proves its value and the need for it. I used it when I went on holiday to Brugge with my wife and friends, and I know about the quality that Superfast and the people of Brugge provide. I hope that the minister can give us further assurances—not only for me, but more for the benefit of Scotland's tourism and freight—that he is putting his full efforts into retaining and expanding such a great service. He will be assured of my backing if he continues to do so.
I congratulate John Park on securing the debate.
I declare a constituency interest. Forth Ports is based in Grangemouth, and many hauliers who use the Rosyth ferry are based in Falkirk East. They carry paper, forest products, seafood, electronics, whisky and other spirits, and many other manufactured goods. Rosyth is easily accessible and, contrary to what some have claimed, the Rosyth to Zeebrugge service has been a success for passengers and freight traffic. It is popular with hauliers in my constituency, and I have heard many good reports about it from passengers.
The service is an attractive alternative to air travel—the growth in passenger numbers shows that—and we need such services if we are to meet our climate change targets.
In many ways, the freight operation is important to, and dovetails neatly with, freight movements through the port of Grangemouth. Together, both operations are essential to the health and growth of the Scottish economy. They handle a huge proportion of Scotland's exports; indeed, I have been told that a tenth of Scotland's gross domestic product moves through Grangemouth.
With appropriate development, the Rosyth market could be significantly expanded. Many lorries and car transporters still travel hundreds of miles from ports further south, but they could come direct to Scotland from the continent, and vice versa. As fuel costs rise, the competitive advantage of using Rosyth will increase. Moreover, extending sea transport services and reducing road miles results in environmental benefits.
What comes in through Rosyth could treble if we get things right. The market is there for the taking. I was in Rosyth last week and was impressed by the capacity and facilities there. It has a skilled and trained workforce.
The ferry service should represent an attractive opportunity for any new operator. Things may take time, but I call on the Scottish Government to ensure that doors are not closed before solutions can be found. I am sure that back benchers will want to do whatever they can. In that context, I suggest that we set up a cross-party working group to consider what we can do to move things forward.
I look forward to a successful Rosyth ferry service in the future.
Despite being an MSP, I am still a jobbing historian. At the moment, I am editing National Museums Scotland's book on Scottish transport—all 700 pages of it. About a third of the book is devoted to sea transport, from which we have tended to drop away in the recent evolution of Scottish transportation. There has been far too much concentration on roads and even on rail routes, given that we have a marine motorway up the North Sea.
I want to set the problem of the Rosyth to Zeebrugge ferry in the context of the big players in European long-distance road freight transport. Tübingen, where I taught, is just next to Reutlingen, which is the headquarters of the Willi Betz organisation. I am sure that all members have seen their big yellow and blue HGVs on the roads. Since the middle of April this year, Mr Thomas Betz, the managing director of the company, has been in Stammheim jail in Stuttgart, having been found guilty of bribery, coercion, employing a labour force from Bulgaria and registering his brand new vehicles in Azerbaijan, and has also been fined €5 million. The Willi Betz organisation is not a minor rotten apple of European road freight, but is the biggest spediteur in Europe. The case gives one some idea of the problems that an alternative has in coping with a system that is run by cowboys.
Sixty per cent of vehicles coming off the ferries during a live broadcast of the "Today" programme from Dover in November last year were overweight. At Holyhead, 30 per cent of vehicles coming off ferries from Ireland are overweight. I speak with fairly direct knowledge of the issue, because my brother was an HGV driver for the late lamented Christian Salvesen company, which is now owned by Norbert Dentressangle of France. The douce and decent hauliers of Fife used the Rosyth to Zeebrugge ferry service well, but they were up against very powerful international concerns whose attitude to commerce is that of Long John Silver to commercial Caribbean traffic in the 18th century.
We are in a difficult situation, but we must support attempts to open up competition, especially by sea. We must investigate the new more efficient vessels that are available, especially the Visentini ferries from Trieste, which are only 1 knot slower than the present Superfast ferries, but 50 per cent cheaper to operate. On that basis, we can have services from Zeebrugge to Rosyth and on to Scandinavia and further north, and make the marine motorway that I mentioned a possibility.
That will involve negotiations with the European Union and, above all, trying to get a rational allocation of freight to different modes of transport. It will mean taking on the enormous, powerful and quite unscrupulous lobbies that operate in Brussels. The German Government has reacted impressively to the challenge of the Betz case. We must be as circumspect and wide ranging in the backing that we give to alternatives to road freight haulage. At the moment, the chief of those alternatives from Scotland is sea transport.
I congratulate John Park on securing the debate. I thank him for bringing the issue before Parliament and for giving us the opportunity to air our views on it. The announcement that the Rosyth to Zeebrugge service was to be terminated caused a certain amount of panic in my household, as my wife and I are booked on the ferry for next Thursday. It was with some relief that we discovered that the service will continue throughout most of the summer. However, today members are brought together by the need to ensure that it continues well beyond that period. Too many people in Scotland have failed so far to recognise the importance of the ferry service. The true market for the service is estimated to be far in excess of the number of those who have been prepared to use it to date.
As we see fuel prices rising day after day, many road hauliers and private individuals who seek to get to the continent find that ferry fares pale into insignificance when compared with the cost of running a heavy goods vehicle all the way to an English Channel port in order to access the European market. For that reason, we have to work very hard. We have heard in previous speeches about how important the ferry service is not only for our exports, but for the environment, which is being protected from significant emissions but could be protected further.
The ferry service is not entirely without public subsidy but, having looked at the subsidies that are provided to other ferry services elsewhere in Scotland, I am surprised to discover just how little financial support was necessary to get the service off the ground and to keep it running. For that reason, I am delighted that the ferry service was established.
Before I finish, I will speculate or hypothesise a little about how things could have been rather different. We depend on a foreign-owned company to provide the Rosyth to Zeebrugge ferry service and today there is probably not a single Scottish company that could conceive of providing that important service to Scotland. However, if a bus lane were to run all the way to Zeebrugge, perhaps a Scottish company such as Stagecoach would be ready and willing to bid for the contract to provide that service. Perhaps if there were a railway line that ran from Rosyth to Zeebrugge, a company such as FirstGroup plc—or even First ScotRail, heaven forbid—would be ready to bid for that contract.
We have never taken the opportunity to free up the market in ferry services here in Scotland, so there is no comparable Scottish ferry company ready to bid for that contract. That is why I encourage the minister to consider in the context of the publication tomorrow of the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee's report into ferry services—and with many decisions to be made during his prospective tenure as transport minister—that the time has probably come to give Scotland's private ferry companies the opportunity to compete in the marketplace. Who knows? One day we might have a ferry company fit to rival Stagecoach or First in their ability to compete in international markets.
I thank my friend and colleague, John Park, and congratulate him on securing today's debate. I also thank him for his personal comments about my background in the subject when I was the roads and transportation spokesperson for Fife Council. I am pleased to have had the opportunity at that time to be so closely involved in getting the idea of the Superfast ferry off the ground in the first place when there were so many doubting Thomases around. We still bear the scars of that period in Fife Council.
A fortnight ago, I had the privilege to represent the Health and Sport Committee at a meeting of EMILE—the European elected members information and liaison exchange. Although I was at the meeting primarily as a health representative, I took the opportunity to raise issues about the Superfast ferry with the Minister for Europe, External Affairs and Culture and civil servants. The minister said that she and the civil servants are involved in detailed meetings and a plethora of work on the matter. I have no doubt that Stewart Stevenson, the transport minister, will tell us shortly about the work that is going on.
When I was trying to get the idea of the ferry service off the ground, I worked closely with the North Sea Commission and the Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions, which are very relevant to Scotland. Although I am highlighting the short-term goal that we need to consider, I say to the minister that in the longer term, we have to encourage local authorities in Scotland that previously had detailed involvement with organisations such as the North Sea Commission, which has been a standing organisation for many years, to become much more involved once again. I am aware that Peter Grant and his colleagues from Fife Council have not attended any of the meetings of the North Sea Commission.
That commission was where we put together some of the nuts and bolts with which to get the ferry service off the ground—we had credibility from working with local authorities on the North Sea, which was very persuasive when it came to approaching the European Commission. I hope that, although we have a short-term imperative, the longer-term imperative will not be lost. We should encourage local authorities to get heavily involved with the North Sea Commission and the Baltic Sea Commission because that would open up opportunities, of which we should be mindful.
I have also had the privilege to be involved as a member of the Scottish Parliament in work that has been undertaken with Ireland through the British-Irish Inter-parliamentary Body, through which I have met industrialists, parliamentarians and others who are keen to see a route via Stranraer that continues all the way up through Rosyth and over to the Baltic, just as there is a trans-Pennine route that continues all the way across to Europe. I hope that the minister will speak with some of our European colleagues to see what we can do about that.
Like Alex Johnstone, I panicked when I heard about the likely demise of the Superfast ferry, as I am booked to travel on it on 6 July. There was some concern in my home because I will drive to eastern Europe. There are now about 30,000 people in this country who own a property or a business in Bulgaria, let alone the other eastern European countries, and they will be seriously affected by the Superfast Ferries decision. As Alex Johnstone rightly pointed out, the cost of fuel is so high that it is imperative that we encourage the continuing development of ferry routes. Industrialists throughout Fife and central Scotland, as elsewhere, are key to that.
Cathy Peattie's suggestion that we establish a cross-party group is excellent, so I hope that John Park will undertake to do that. However, perhaps what we need is not just a cross-party group, but a cross-Parliament group involving the Westminster Parliament and the European Parliament. The matter needs to be addressed urgently, as there are short-term goals that must be achieved. I wish the minister, John Park and my other colleagues well in their efforts on what is a critical cross-party issue for all of us.
I commend John Park for his efforts in bringing the debate to Parliament and for the phrasing of his motion, which has enabled the widest possible support on a multi-party basis. It is a model of what a members' business debate can usefully do. In particular, I pick out of the motion the words that sum up the way that we all feel—"deeply disappointed". The disappointment is not just John Park's; it is shared by us all, including me.
In the time that is available, I will attempt to address a range of issues that have been raised in the debate. Before I do so, however, I extend a general invitation. I am happy to meet members—preferably collectively, as that is the most effective way of doing things—to discuss in confidence some of the matters that it would not be appropriate to put in the Official Report of the Parliament, so that we can maintain, from here forward, the clear and useful consensus that has been expressed in the debate. I hope that members feel that that is useful.
We first became aware in January of some issues associated with the service, although at that stage its withdrawal was not on the agenda. We had a couple of meetings with the local management; the first at their behest, the second at my behest. Matters then moved on, and we became aware in April of the plans to close the service. I went with Alan Burns of Forth Ports to visit the owners of the ferry company in Athens. I regret to say that it was the only time that I have been to Greece and I did not leave the airport. I hope to enjoy my next visit there rather more than I enjoyed that visit. We were heard courteously and with good grace, but we did not like what we heard in return.
So we started to take the relevant actions to see what we could put in place to help. We sought to change Attica's mind. We sought as a secondary objective to get it to move the date of withdrawal further back in the calendar—members will know that the last sailing is planned for 13 September. We had no success in that, although we bought some additional time before the announcement, which was helpful in exploring some options.
On the day of and in the hours before the announcement, I had further discussions by telephone with the company owners in an attempt to turn them away at the last moment from the course of action that we now know they are taking. I regret that I had no success.
Will the minister confirm that the ferry service was a commercial success but did not prove to be sufficiently profitable for the company to maintain it?
Attica says that the route is commercially viable, and we agree with that assessment. However, Attica has had a number of challenges. Its main interest is as a ship broker rather than a ferry operator, and its trading history shows that in this decade it has sold substantially more ships than it deploys on its ferry routes.
We broadly accept that the Superfast ferries that originally served the route could have proved a commercial success. However, other aspects of the business were perhaps not pursued to best effect. The marketing outside the United Kingdom was minimal and ineffective, with the result that a company whose cost base was largely denominated in euros had an income stream that was largely denominated in pounds. As the exchange rate changed, that caused particular difficulties for the company. Those facts illuminate some of the points that Mr Johnstone and Dr Harvie made on where the most effective companies might reside. Recognising that the route is commercially viable, Attica is continuing to make figures available to others who have an interest in operating the route.
Before drawing to a conclusion, I will try to pick up on some points made by members. John Park referred to Michelin Tyre. A key point is that the daily service enabled it to provide a specific facility. The cut to one ship dramatically reduced the effectiveness of the service, and the situation was not helped by the change to the ship that now sails, which has nothing like the original capacity. In 2004, 41,450 units made the crossing, but in 2007 the figure was 22,552—because of capacity constraint rather than anything else.
Jim Tolson spoke about public money. It is worth pointing out that most of it was a capital investment in shore-side infrastructure, which will be available for any future operation. The waterborne freight grant is still available—€2 million is still to be drawn down. Subject to an application being made by a new operator, I would expect it to be available. The Flanders Government is fully engaged; it approached us and we are having discussions with it.
I acknowledge Cathy Peattie's constituency interest. I have met several of the freight operators in her constituency, and she is right that road miles are important. Chris Harvie said that slower ferries might be more effective. I caution him on that because, on a long crossing such as Rosyth to Zeebrugge, and considering the turnaround times, there are significant difficulties with slower ferries.
Alex Johnstone and I will probably continue to disagree about the future structures of the ferry industry in Scotland, but the Government will consider carefully the report from the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee when it is published.
Are companies interested in the route? On the public record, I can say that John White of the NORSHUKON group has indicated an interest, and we are continuing discussions with it. We have basically approached everybody we can think of in this country and elsewhere. We are continuing to engage, and there are still options that may deliver a successful outcome. It will be extremely challenging to ensure that there is no break in service—I want to manage expectations on that—but in the longer term there will be opportunities.
The economic climate is tough, and it is a particularly difficult time for anyone to consider new transport services generally. We are continuing to work with people, and I express again our wish and willingness to work with members who are interested in the subject. Today's debate is not the end of the story, merely a part of it. I hope that the members who have attended it feel that all members of all parties are engaged in the issue and recognise its importance.
Meeting suspended until 14:15.
On resuming—