To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the procurement process for the small vessel replacement programme. (S6O-03378)

Ministers are currently considering the outline business case for phase 1 of the small vessel replacement programme, which includes the potential approach to procurement. We expect an update on the outcome in the coming weeks. I know that many members are keen to know that outcome. However, it would not be appropriate for me to comment in detail while the business case is still being reviewed.

The recent launch of the Glen Rosa at the Ferguson Marine shipyard in Port Glasgow was a milestone for the yard. It was also a reminder that the completion of the two vessels nears and that the yard needs to secure future work. I am aware that procurement is the responsibility of Màiri McAllan as Cabinet Secretary for Wellbeing Economy, Net Zero and Energy, but will Ms Hyslop reaffirm her commitment to the yard and its workforce? Will she also confirm that the Scottish Government will aim to ensure that future work comes to the yard?

I agree that that was a milestone moment for Ferguson Marine and its workers. I point out that, under the current arrangements, the Cabinet Secretary for Transport is responsible for procurement, although, as I think Ms McAllan set out in response to a similar question yesterday, we are collectively considering the business case as it has been presented. Ms McAllan previously declared that

“we will leave no stone unturned when it comes to securing a sustainable future for Ferguson Marine”,—[Official Report, 18 April 2024; c 4.]

as she currently has responsibility for Ferguson Marine as a company.

We know that Ferguson Marine is actively pursuing future work, and we will continue to support it in any way that we can to secure new contracts and a sustainable future for commercial shipbuilding in Scotland.

There are a number of supplementaries, and I will try to take them all.

I hear what the Cabinet secretary is saying about making a decision in the coming weeks, but the small ferries have been designed and are ready to go out to tender. Is it her preference to put that work out to tender or to give a direct award? What does “in the coming weeks” mean? Does she have a deadline?

As Mr Simpson might understand, the Government is currently changing and we are in a transition period. The business case is still being reviewed. He will know that a direct award can be given only in specific cases, and there must be legal certainty that it can be given in such cases. I am not going to state a preference or say what is possible. The Government has to do what is responsible, which requires consideration of a whole load of areas. My priority as transport secretary is to provide what the islanders want.

Until we start to see more new vessels coming into the CalMac fleet, we will basically be holding CalMac hostage to fortune, because maintenance costs for the old fleet are going up. Does the Cabinet secretary accept that, until CalMac can get the new ferries on and we start to see a programme for them being put in place, islanders will continually be let down?

I have always acknowledged that the fleet’s resilience depends on its renewal. That is why we have six major new vessels being delivered before 2025, which will make a considerable difference. However, Alex Rowley is right that we need to have an on-going programme, which is exactly what the small vessel replacement programme is.

We will ensure that deployment can progress as quickly and responsibly as possible, because we want to ensure that islanders have the benefit of the new vessels. It would mean having 13 new vessels in that period, which in itself will help with the improvement of services. However, we have a few hurdles to get over during the next period to ensure that we can do that.

I reassure members that the small vessel replacement programme is a priority—as, I am sure, it will be for the incoming First Minister.

I am struggling to see whether it is a priority, Cabinet secretary, because I was asking those questions two years ago. I asked a question about the programme on 5 March, and then yesterday I asked when the scheme would happen. We keep getting answers such as that it will happen “in the coming weeks”. I do not think that that is good enough. Island communities have waited years for the new vessels, and the yard is already becoming extremely nervous about its future. We really need a timescale before the end of this parliamentary year, at the end of June, as to when a decision will be made.

I appreciate that Kenny Gibson has consistently pursued the programme, which will most definitely benefit the island communities in his Constituency just as it will benefit others elsewhere. I can reassure the member—and I hope that he has seen this—that, since I came to office, I have persistently pushed all those involved, whether our own officials or those at Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd, and that a lot of good work has been done. We are now ready to go out to procurement and we have the funding available to do so, as has been indicated by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance.

There are a number of decisions within the Government involving interrelated responsibilities that must be very carefully considered. I want to give certainty to islanders that the additional vessels will be procured and can be delivered to help them. Our island communities deserve to have the services that they need. The businesses in those communities deserve that, and individuals and communities on the islands deserve that.

There is good will across the chamber to see the Government award the contract to Ferguson Marine, to ensure that a long-term shipbuilding programme can happen in Scotland. If there is an opportunity to get round this situation, it might be for the Government to arrange a competition, but a high social value weighting must be applied to the contract and any shipbuilding activity that takes place under the contract must happen in Scotland. The Government could instantly act as the owner of the shipyard, leasing it to whomever wins the competition, thus achieving the same outcome. Might the Cabinet secretary consider that as an alternative?

I appreciate the member’s suggestion. The outline business case is currently being considered by ministers, and that includes the potential route to procurement. I will update members, but we have been working on a case-by-case basis in the direct awarding of public contracts. Under public procurement rules, that is possible only under strictly limited circumstances. However, we have been tasking officials to consider different ways of achieving what might be of benefit. I would caution members that anything that we do, including what the member is suggesting, has to meet procurement and other legislative requirements.