Exclusive:Ferries fiasco Scotland: Ministers agreed NDA over work examining costs of continuing ferry construction

Ministers rejected the suggestion the gagging clause had led to reduced scrutiny by Holyrood of the additional costs for hulls 801 and 802.

A previously undisclosed gagging clause is not behind ministerial decisions to keep secret a key report into whether it would have cheaper to re-tender the contract for two significantly over-budget and delayed ferries currently being built at Ferguson Marine shipyard, Scotland’s economy secretary has maintained.

It comes as The Scotsman can reveal officials within the Scottish Government signed a non-disclosure agreement for the work undertaken by consultancy giants Teneo to examine whether it would be value for money to continue the construction of the two ferries at the Port Glasgow shipyard.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

However, it concluded that continuing to build hull 802, set to be delivered in 2024, would be more expensive that re-tendering the contract for the ship.

Ferguson Marine yard in Port Glasgow. Picture: John DevlinFerguson Marine yard in Port Glasgow. Picture: John Devlin
Ferguson Marine yard in Port Glasgow. Picture: John Devlin

This resulted in only the sixth use of formal ministerial ‘written authority’ where a minister must overrule formal, financial advice from the civil service, with Neil Gray committing an additional £72 million to the yard, with the total cost of both vessels now over £300m.

Ministers have since come under pressure to publish the Teneo report, which cost more than £600,000 to the taxpayer, including from Holyrood’s Public Audit Committee.

The committee, which is examining failings at the yard, had their request to see the report refused.

However, emails disclosed to The Scotsman through freedom of information show the Scottish Government’s civil servants within the Strategic Commercial Assets Division initiated the signing of a non-disclosure agreement for the Teneo report.

After being signed by an unnamed government individual, most likely a senior civil servant, it was passed to chief executive of Ferguson Marine, David Tydeman on September 29 last year, who returned it signed within half an hour.

One official said it was necessary to sign the document while the completion of a different contract, most likely the First Marine International productivity report which is also being kept secret, was being completed.

They added that the documentation was “very standard” but allowed “early engagement in the discussions to let you all work together on the best potential options”.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

While the existence of the gagging clause was published through an FOI response by Ferguson Marine, there is no mention of the document in disclosures in response to similar requests to the Scottish Government.

Instead, there is a reference to the contract for Teneo – approved through the framework for commercial advisers – has “the relevant confidentiality agreements in place”.

Neil Gray, the Scottish Government’s economy secretary, rejected the suggestion the non-disclosure agreement had impacted the government’s decision on publishing the report.

However, he also said that the government must “respect client confidentiality” and Teneo’s “intellectual property rights”.

The minister told The Scotsman: “I understand why there is an interest there but we’ve got to make sure that we are protecting the interests of Ferguson’s and making sure that they are able to operate competitively and that the advisers of both Ferguson’s and ourselves in delivering on those ferries, their intellectual property is also protected as is the norm in these type of cases.

“Those are discussions are between and a contractor that are about ensuring that we are protecting both Ferguson’s and our advisers both in terms of their intellectual property and about ensuring that we are not putting Ferguson’s at a competitive disadvantage.

"That’s why any of the material that we haven’t been able to disclose, that’s the reason why.”

Pushed on whether the existence of the gagging agreement had impacted his decision to not publish the report, Mr Gray failed to answer and said the decision to grant written authority was done to protect the workforce and the wider community.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Critics said the existence of the non-disclosure agreement was another example of “yet more secrecy”.

Graham Simpson, the Scottish Conservative transport spokesperson, said the SNP’s handling of the “ferries saga is getting murkier by the day”.

He added: “Neil Gray should be ensuring that light is shone into the dark corners of the ferries fiasco rather than allowing yet more secrecy to prevail. It's obvious Scottish taxpayers had no chance of a transparent process around Ferguson Marine.

"Not only has this left our island communities frustrated by unfinished ferries. The wider Scottish public are having to carry the can for the mess the SNP have created."

Alex Rowley, transport spokesperson for Scottish Labour said the SNP had gone to “extraordinary lengths to keep this fiasco shrouded in secrecy”.

“Taxpayers have paid millions of pounds, islanders have waited years extra, and shipyard workers have been left cleaning up a mess they did not make. Everyone deserves answers about what has gone on here - but instead we have a government hiding key documents and pushing for gagging orders,” he said.

“The SNP must end the culture of cover-up and give the public the transparency they deserve.”

Economy spokesperson for the Scottish Liberal Democrats, Willie Rennie echoed the concerns.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

He said: “Secrecy has been just as much a hallmark of this fiasco as the overspends and delays. This was a dreadful report and the islanders and workers who have been betrayed deserve the full picture.

“We need a recovery programme for Fergusons so that it is capable of winning future contracts, but that will be harder if SNP ministers continue to hide the truth about what’s really going on at the government-owned shipyard.”

The Scottish Government was contacted for comment.

Comments

 0 comments

Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.