³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

My understanding of the written authority process is that the Deputy First Minister and the First Minister are required to be part of the process of issuing written authority because of its nature. I will need to check, but I am pretty sure that they will have been sighted on my decision to decline the publication of the report, but that was a decision for me and Mr Irwin.

Yes.

I met colleagues present, who were at that time fed up of seeing my face on the screen, because I had requested quite a number of meetings and discussions. The First Minister and the Deputy First Minister were part of those as well, because of the nature of the written authority process. We ensured that we had rigorously interrogated the information that was before us.

No. If an accountable officer had been concerned at any stage, they would have had to request written authority to proceed.

I and my colleagues are in constant dialogue with Mr Tydeman and I am looking forward to having the opportunity to visit the yard in the summer recess in order to see for myself the progress that is being made.

Lessons are being learned for the delivery of 802 from what has happened with 801. We have spoken about the design difficulties that led to cost increases and delays with 801. My hope is certainly that that knowledge will minimise any further delays and any other cost increases. Clearly, it is not something that I can absolutely guarantee, but we are having discussions with the yard about ensuring that everything that is possible is being done to expedite the process and to minimise costs at all times while doing so—not least because of the overriding concern that I had in taking the decision to issue written authority, which was about delivering the vessels for our island communities as quick as possible.

I hope that, in Mr Tydeman’s contribution to the committee, he was able to say that that is similarly his overriding objective at present.

We arrived at it through discussions, the market awareness that we have from work elsewhere with vessels that we have procured from Turkey and the awareness that we have of the estimated time that it would take to go through the procurement process and for the ship to be built and delivered. I stress that May 2027 would be the earliest possible date that we could see a reprocured 802 delivered from elsewhere.

No. I will need to check, but I do not think that that was part of the consideration. The consideration was about completing 802 or reprocuring it elsewhere. Whether FMPG could have been part of that procurement process is for deliberation, but it was purely about estimating the cost and the delivery timescale of reprocurement compared with those of completing 802 at the yard, which we are currently progressing.

That was not scientific. I concur with Mr Hoy’s assertion on that.

The overriding consideration for me was the impact on island communities of not completing vessel 802 at the yard as quickly as possible. Colleagues who are here at the meeting and other colleagues in the Parliament have acknowledged that it was the right decision to ensure that 802 was completed as quickly as possible because of the impact on island communities. It does not take a deep dive or a wide assessment to understand that impact, because we have been living it in the disruption that there has been for island communities for so long.

The reference that I made to conversations that I have had with Stuart McMillan and Ronnie Cowan was anecdotal and not scientific, as Mr Hoy suggests.

Convener, to be fair, that is not the only suggestion that I have made about the reasons for the substantive elements of the delays. I spoke earlier about the design problems with the vessels, which are the substantive element. However, with regard to the more recent issues and Mr Hoy’s questions about the future and progress on completing the two vessels, the overriding issues over the past number of months—and the reason why additional funds have been requested—have certainly been driven by the design difficulties but also by the economic factors. There is no doubt about that. Mr Irwin’s seeking my authority made that plain. He was not able to forecast the final cost with sufficient certainty because of the economic turbulence in the market. I do not think that it would be fair to put that to one side and suggest that the project is somehow immune from the economic conditions that we are working in when other projects are suffering from those difficulties.

Yards around the world would be able to look at what is being said in the report and benchmark their own work based on what has been produced as part of it. Competitiveness is not the only element that I must consider; there is also the intellectual property that is attached to the report from Teneo’s point of view. Unfortunately, I am not able to release that information.