Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 15 January 2026
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2875 contributions

|

Economy and Fair Work Committee

Scotland’s Supply Chain

Meeting date: 9 November 2022

Colin Beattie

Good morning. There are a number of areas that I would like to explore a little bit, but I want to begin by saying that many of the issues around supply chains and everything that goes with them seem to come back to the incredibly poorly managed hard Brexit that we have been forced to go through. The knock-on effect of that seems to resonate all the way through our papers.

Specific skills gaps have been highlighted to the committee in this inquiry and, indeed, in other inquiries that we have carried out. One such area is digital skills. I note that, in your response, you say that a report on the Scottish technology ecosystem review is due to be published in the autumn. Can you provide any update on that work?

Economy and Fair Work Committee

Scotland’s Supply Chain

Meeting date: 9 November 2022

Colin Beattie

I will move on to a slightly different issue. How is the cost crisis hitting Scotland’s supply chain? How challenging for industry are the energy and material price increases? Are there particular sectors that are especially exposed to that?

Economy and Fair Work Committee

Scotland’s Supply Chain

Meeting date: 9 November 2022

Colin Beattie

Given that this is a crisis for all our businesses, are any meaningful talks going on between the UK Government and the other three nations, especially Scotland, to try to manage the situation, reach a common result and make improvements?

Economy and Fair Work Committee

Scotland’s Supply Chain

Meeting date: 9 November 2022

Colin Beattie

Given the complexity of the digital requirements in the market, it must be quite difficult to provide a one-size-fits-all solution. We see in different segments of the market different needs and priorities, and there are different speeds of development. For example, I will just throw in e-commerce and the speed with which that is moving. How can we keep up with that to ensure that the skills that are being taught and passed on by our institutions and agencies are right up to date and at the correct level?

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 4 November 2022

Colin Beattie

First Minister, I would like to start with a couple of questions about money. I refer you to pages 35 and 36 of the Auditor General’s report, and specifically to paragraph 72. This is in relation to the £45 million that the Scottish Government loaned to FMEL. There were some problems with CBC carrying out its side of the bargain. It paid only part of the investment that it said that it would make into FMEL, and there was some disagreement with the Scottish Government over the structure of loans. Can you give more background on that?

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 4 November 2022

Colin Beattie

It is paragraph 72.

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 4 November 2022

Colin Beattie

I am looking at the Auditor General’s report, and specifically at paragraphs 81 to 83. The sequence of events that led to FMEL entering administration in August 2019 seems almost like a progression of that dispute, to the extent that

“the Scottish Government concluded ... there was no legal basis for CMAL to pay more than the fixed price for the contract.”

That seems to imply that that was the trigger for FMEL entering administration. When the Scottish Government took that decision, was there any thought that that might result in FMEL going into administration?

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 4 November 2022

Colin Beattie

Continuing on the question of good faith, most probably, I am looking at the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee’s report of 9 December 2020, which makes it very clear that, in connection with the staged payments that had been made,

“there is strong evidence that the contractor deliberately proceeded to construct specific sections of the vessel either out of sequence or not according to the proper specification purely as a means of triggering milestone payments on the contract.”

That is a strong statement. The Auditor General has also highlighted those payments.

Subsequently, as I understand it, CMAL took legal advice, which was that it had to make the payments. Was there any discussion between ministers, you and the Cabinet about that issue?

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 4 November 2022

Colin Beattie

The Auditor General’s report says:

“By May 2019, the relationship between CMAL and FMEL had broken down completely.”

The report goes on to say that FMEL had said that it was going to have

“significant redundancies and CMAL notified Scottish ministers of its intention to cancel the contract for vessel 801 and make a call on the surety bond”.

Was that ever done? Did CMAL ever do that?

Public Audit Committee

Section 23 Report: “New vessels for the Clyde and Hebrides: Arrangements to deliver vessels 801 and 802”

Meeting date: 4 November 2022

Colin Beattie

Continuing that aspect, I note that one of the factors that exacerbated the staged payments issues was the relationship between CMAL and FMEL, which seems to have deteriorated at an early point to the extent that, we understand, CMAL could not get access to the yard.

Although there was discussion about the possibility of a dispute resolution mechanism, it never happened. CMAL received legal advice that it must continue making the staged payments despite the fact that it had no sight of what was happening. That was obviously escalated up the line from CMAL. To what extent were you aware that it was discussed with ministers? Did you have any sight of those issues? What did ministers say about resolving the dispute, which involved a major issue?