Sir,
Alasdair Allan’s vicar-
However, the only paragraph that matters is the second last one in which he states that the CalMac contract “may attract state aid rules’. In other words, there are two unresolved areas of doubt: (a) if the contract attracts state aid rules at all, and (b) if the Teckal Exemption applies.
This is exactly what the trade unions have been arguing as the basis of an eminently reasonable demand that the Scottish Government should not have proceeded with the tendering process without seeking definitive evidence that they were required to do so.
As the Scottish TUC has pointed out, the Scottish Government went to the European Commission for a derogation which enabled them to extend the lifetime of the forthcoming contract but “dodged the fundamental question of whether a tender competition is necessary in law”.
The reason for this reluctance lies in the original statement by the then minister, Keith Brown, that they expected at least four bidders and by promoting competition they would drive costs down. These are not the words of a reluctant privateer, driven to act by oppressive EU regulations, but of an enthusiastic believer that public services should go to the lowest bidder.
Contrary to Mr Brown’s predictions, there was only one private sector bidder – Serco. In the intervening period, there have been umpteen grounds for disqualifying them if the will existed, but as Mr Brown made clear, that would negate the reasons for the Scottish Government promoting this competition in the first place.
As a relative newcomer to these matters, Mr Wilson may not appreciate that this battle has been going on for at least 30 years with forces in Edinburgh – and nowhere else – determined to privatise CalMac. On each occasion so far, these efforts have been repelled.
In a previous life, I met with European Commission officials who confirmed their lack of interest in forcing competitive tendering on the CalMac routes. However, they were in the position of having repeatedly had the issue waved under their noses by civil servants seeking EU cover for instigating a competition. That, I am sure, is exactly what has happened again on this occasion.
Nobody doubts that EU rules allow for competitive tendering of lifeline public services. But they do not compel it. That imperative has come from the Scottish Government and the Scottish Government alone, for the reasons so helpfully set out by Keith Brown when this process was launched.
I suspect that there is now some awareness within SNP ranks of the stupidity of what they have embarked upon. The problem is that, having created the competition – something which no previous government at Westminster or Holyrood achieved – there can be no certainty about the outcome.
The people who work for CalMac, their families and the communities which depend upon CalMac services will only find out what the future holds when it is too late to do anything about it – and that too is a cynical disgrace.
Brian Wilson
Cnoc na Meinn
7a Mangersta
Isle of Lewis
Letter: "Cynical disgrace" of SNP ferry tendering
11 April 2016