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 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 30 June 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1578 contributions

|

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of the Water Industry Commission for Scotland”

Meeting date: 19 February 2025

Jamie Greene

I understand that. On 19 September, the former chair said this to the committee:

“we sought approval from the sponsor team for that approach. The approval was given in a phone call involving the deputy director in the sponsor team”.—[Official Report, Public Audit Committee, 19 September 2024; c 30.]

I will repeat the question. Was that approval given erroneously?

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of the Water Industry Commission for Scotland”

Meeting date: 19 February 2025

Jamie Greene

Let me ask another question on this in light of what we heard in the opening statement from Mr Hinds, the new chair. He said that he was “shocked and dismayed” by the content of the section 22 report. He talked in detail about weaknesses in financial governance and a loss of public confidence in the agency. My question is quite simple: why on earth was the former chief executive allowed to resign from his position? Why was he not sacked?

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of the Water Industry Commission for Scotland”

Meeting date: 19 February 2025

Jamie Greene

And what about the public perception? If anybody in this room had been subject to the damning report that was issued and everything that has since come to light around financial mismanagement of public money, we would have been out the door on our ears in seconds—we would be on the front page of newspapers already. There is no way any of us could walk away from that with six months’ pay. WICS is a public body, and we are talking about public money. Can you understand why there is so much public anger around this?

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of the Water Industry Commission for Scotland”

Meeting date: 19 February 2025

Jamie Greene

In November, after the last time we met to discuss this in September, we received a submission from Mr Sutherland, which I want to refer to. I do not know whether you have a copy of it. There is one particular item that struck me as of interest. I am quoting:

“On leaving WICS, I was required to delete or destroy all materials relating to my employment. I did not question this request.”

He goes on to say:

“I was required to destroy any and all materials ... I did so diligently.”

Who asked him to destroy any and all materials relating to his employment, and why?

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of the Water Industry Commission for Scotland”

Meeting date: 19 February 2025

Jamie Greene

There are lots of other questions around this, but my final one on the severance issue is for the Scottish Government, because, ultimately, you are the sponsor of this public body.

What are you doing differently now, given what we now know about the sponsorship arrangements between the Government and WICS? Can you give me and the public some reassurance that we will not see public money similarly spent and squandered in future?

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 5 February 2025

Jamie Greene

Okay. That sort of answered the question.

Over the past couple of years, one of the major sources of pain has been the fact that the vessels that were due to be delivered involved complicated systems that the yard had not made before. By that, I mean the dual fuel LNG systems that had to go into the Glen Sannox and the Glen Rosa. Does that also present an opportunity? Are you coming out of that experience with expertise and with proprietary knowledge or IP that is sellable in the open market? Alternatively, do you think that you have really burned your hands on that technology and that your business would rather do something else?

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 5 February 2025

Jamie Greene

Absolutely.

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 5 February 2025

Jamie Greene

What are the intentions for the long-term future of the yard? Is it still the stated intention of the Scottish Government to return the yard to private ownership? If so, when will that happen?

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 5 February 2025

Jamie Greene

Right.

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2023/24 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 5 February 2025

Jamie Greene

I will spread my questions across two parts, because other members would like to come in.

Mr Petticrew, it is really good to hear of your passion for the yard. I know that you inherited what has, over the years, been a very difficult situation on the journey to deliver ferries. Anyone who lives, works or has roots in that part of the world will share your ambition to see the yard succeed. I hope that we will talk a little more about its future, in due course.

I will pick up on one or two things. I will talk about the budget and finances briefly. In our evidence session on 16 January, there was some confusion over some of the numbers involved, so I want to see whether we can clarify them—in particular, about the money that the Scottish Government has allocated to the yard.

10:30  

The Parliament agreed to the general principles of the Budget (Scotland) (No 4) Bill at stage 1 yesterday. The draft budget has a line for Ferguson Marine of £47.9 million for the coming financial year. In addition, a statement was made last year about £14.2 million of capital funding being made available for—I presume—investment in and upgrading of the yard’s infrastructure. Perhaps sitting alongside that is a pot of cash to complete the MV Glen Rosa. We will come to that in a second.

Can we clarify the numbers? Does the £47 million or £48 million in the draft budget include or exclude the £14 million of capital expenditure? Will any money that is needed in addition to what has already been put aside to complete the Glen Rosa—it sounds like it might incur more costs—come out of that, or is there a separate pot of cash to complete the Glen Rosa?