The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Displaying 2547 contributions
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 28 April 2022
Willie Coffey
Do you engage directly with the public? If you are saying, “We used to spend all this money on delivering this care and we no longer do that”, does that have an impact, or are you still able to deliver the same level and quality of care through the transformation process that you have embraced as a result of the Audit Scotland report and the Public Audit Committee’s interest in the work that you do?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 28 April 2022
Willie Coffey
Sorry, Antony—I just want to come in here. Did Ferguson dispute that the cables were too short?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 28 April 2022
Willie Coffey
Okay—thank you.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 28 April 2022
Willie Coffey
I know that none of us is an expert in building ships. Nonetheless, Auditor General, do you recognise that some of these issues are recurring themes for the Public Audit Committee? For example, proper investment and effort in design at the early stage gives every project, no matter what it is, a fair chance of success. If you do not invest that energy at the outset, you are unlikely to be successful at the end of the process.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 28 April 2022
Willie Coffey
Thank you for that.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 28 April 2022
Willie Coffey
Thank you for that, Pamela. That is very encouraging. Tapadh leat.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 28 April 2022
Willie Coffey
Thanks very much, convener, and madainn mhath to the panel from NHS Highland. I start by reminding everyone that when a health board comes before the Public Audit Committee it is usually because of Audit Scotland knocking on the door and this Scottish Parliament committee having a look at matters.
To your great credit, you appear to have turned your finances around. However, my question is, how can there be such a transformation on finances with no impact on healthcare, or the public’s perception of it, in NHS Highland? You said that nothing of significant concern resulted from that. If you do not mind, please tell us how that can be.
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 28 April 2022
Willie Coffey
I will ask about the general application of quality standards. That is a recurring theme, as we all know, but in this case, they apply to the shipbuilding industry. Over many years, the committee has heard about the importance of thorough planning and design at the outset of any project, whether it be a piece of software, a bridge or vessels, as in this case.
On page 25 is your report, you say that Ferguson started building the vessels before the designs were agreed with CMAL, which led to substantial reworking being required, with
“increased costs and delays”
and
“no link to quality standards.”
Those are the words in your report.
Why was that allowed to happen at the outset? Surely nobody would start building something before they knew what they were being asked to build. Do such failures mean that there was little prospect of a successful construction outcome further down the line?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 28 April 2022
Willie Coffey
My questions relate to the application of quality standards in design and construction, Auditor General. As you and members are well aware, that is a common theme at the committee over many years.
The Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee took around a year to carry out its inquiry into the matter and its findings were published in December 2020. Its report, which has more than 100 pages, is full of commentary, conclusions and recommendations. Your report came out in March this year. Did you, in your analysis of the situation, make any substantive new findings compared to what the committee reported in its inquiry?
Public Audit Committee
Meeting date: 28 April 2022
Willie Coffey
I was just coming to that particular issue. Paragraph 50 of the report says that “CMAL could only advise” and not require Ferguson to alter its approach to design and construction. I have never heard of a quality standard worth its salt in which the customer cannot instruct the builder to carry out its wishes.
What then emerged were these owner observation reports that members will have read about in the various documents. In quality management parlance, these are change requests, which are common in any other effective quality standard. However, according to your report, there were 346 such reports, only half of which had been carried out by the time Ferguson went into administration. Was the scale of that particular outcome unusual in your experience? Was it a symptom of the failure to agree in advance the designs of this peculiar construction, effectively meaning that everyone paid the price later on in the project?