 Y cyfnod y次b ymddangos wedi'u cyfnod y Ffionahyslop i gafodd gennych yr un-gwaith a gennych gyferfans yr hyn sydd y cyfrif y dyfynogiad, mae yna pethau gwaith o b daddi Ludwyrno o ddeicam fy moddydd ac yn Gwain Pedrofiol, dweud fy moddym ein hysnad. Rwy'n fyddon gyda'n buswys yr hunig i gael buswys am gyfnod y gwaith ffionahyslop wedi'u gafodd gyferfans yr ungymdig, ac mae gydag admai'r cyfrif yr unig cyfnod yw hynny. I am acutally aware of the importance of these lifeline services for island communities and I'm committed to delivering an appropriate replacement for the contract, which is due to expire at the end of September 2024. I recognise that the resilience and reliability of these services has been subject to a great deal of scrutiny both within this building and crucially by the communities that they serve. The next shift's contract is vital to our efforts to drive improvements across the network, and therefore we must carefully consider the optimum model, hence the time taken to arrive at this decision. I was struck by a comment from the chair of the Ferries community board, who in evidence to the Parliament's net zero energy and transport committee's inquiry, whose report we debated last week said, one thing that we have to break from is having an operator being told to just do a timetable. That results in no recognition of need or what the services should be. It stops flexibility. That concept of flexibility must be key to any future process, ensuring that we can tailor service levels to effectively respond to community needs. As I highlighted in the debate last week, this Government has no plans to unbundle or split up the network. We have considered two options for contractual arrangements to ensure continued operation of the services, either a direct award to the current operator in what is known as a TECO arrangement in accordance with the Public Contract Scotland Regulations 2015, or a competitive tender on the open market. Having considered the benefits and risks of each, I wanted to update Parliament on Scottish Government's ministers' preferred way forward, which is to explore a direct award. I want to be clear that, before any final decision is taken, due diligence process will establish the feasibility of that approach from a financial, operational and legal perspective. In terms of value and importance to our island communities, this is one of the most significant contracts that this Government will enter into and it is vital that we get it right. As I have said, there are a number of complex issues to be resolved before committing to a final decision, including subsidy control, individual entity status and associated accounting requirements. However, I can assure the chamber that those will be examined via a thorough due diligence exercise supported by specialist advisers, which I expect to be completed to allow a final decision to be made by next summer. Central to that process, ministers will seek assurance that a direct award would offer a value for money solution. Subject to a satisfactory outcome, we would then commence the necessary steps to facilitate a direct award. Should that process result in a decision not to proceed with a direct award, then we would revert to a competitive tendering process on the open market. In the meantime, I would like to assure our island communities that I will continue to listen to those who have rightly asked for improved resilience, greater transparency, better communications, responsiveness and sensible flexibility in the service and more certainty for communities, service users and staff. We will continue to engage with all our communities and stakeholders to inform the development of the new contract to ensure that, regardless of the ultimate procurement route, we capture the improvements that we all want to see. I understand community expectations for the service, and I want to be absolutely clear. If we ultimately decide on a direct award, then under no circumstances would that simply mean business as usual. Going down a direct award route would help to change the ethos of the service by shifting the focus from a commercial arrangement to a model, more focused on the delivery of a public service. That would help to create a more agile approach to drive service improvements that we all want to see. Not least, we are determined to improve communication with communities and we will be looking to introduce meaningful performance indicators that better reflect their experience of using the service. We aim to have the new arrangement in place by 1 October next year, meaning that we can start to see benefits for our communities as early as possible. In addition to better operational communication, a direct award would provide us with the opportunity to consider adding CalMac as a relevant authority under the Islands Scotland 2018 Act 2018, strengthening the ability of communities to feed into impact statements and assessments to inform proposed future changes. I recognise that we cannot rely solely on the contractual contract procurement route as the mechanism for driving improvement, and that is why it is only one aspect among a number of measures that this Government is taking to improve shift services for islanders and visitors alike. The contract award preferred route sits alongside the island connectivity plan, the fair fairs review and the future of governance. We are working to introduce a range of policy measures alongside significant investment in new vessels and infrastructure. We will continue to progress the island's connectivity plan with two key documents due for public consultation later this year, a draft strategic paper on wider connectivity issues and a draft long-term plan for vessels and ports, updating the paper that was published last year. Our fairs fair review will also report shortly, and following the success of the road-equivalent tariff, we want to consider fairs policy in a way that is affordable and sustainable for both ferry users and the Government. On governance and following the Project Neptune report on options for change, we have spoken extensively to island communities and stakeholders and it is clear that they want a structure that is more transparent, accountable and customer focused. A direct award would be supported by governance that best supports our goals for the service. This must be reflective of the culture and ethos needed for running a public service. I know that there have been calls for mergers and I am conscious that reform can be unsettling for staff. Change needs to happen to improve accountability and transparency and will happen but form must follow function. I can confirm today that I am not taking any immediate decision at this time on the merger of bodies or governance. I want organisations to focus on delivery of the new contract and the operation to bring the various large vessels into service from next year and the new small vessel replacement work. Of course, any findings or impact of the due diligence exercise should the final decision be a direct award may also impact on decisions on governance structures. I can provide assurance that we will work with the relevant organisations, trade unions and other stakeholders to identify the optimum final governance arrangements. As Minister, I have had a unique opportunity to engage with a wide range of stakeholders and listen to their experiences from this ferry service. Although one of the key recommendations from the Parliament's own net zero energy and transport committee was in favour of a direct award, I recognise that others may prefer a competitive tender. I know that a direct award might not be welcomed by every community and that we will be judged on the improvement that can be delivered. Again, I want to reiterate the status quo of the current service levels is not an option. I expect to direct award to be a catalyst for change, leading to a more efficient flexible model in the delivery of this public service. Alongside the construction of new vessels and infrastructure, I also crucially wish to see a new management culture emerging. One that is more supportive of the communities, customers and passengers served by the network provides greater transparency in communications and which strives for continual improvement through an innovative and responsive approach. Moving to next steps, regard us of the ultimate procurement route, the next shift's contract will not be developed in isolation. I will continue to speak to communities and stakeholders to ensure that we have a service that is delivering for them. My Transport Scotland officials will also be holding a series of engagement events later this month on Aaron, Mull, Islay, Sky and Lewis, followed by a public consultation commencing in December. Further engagement is also planned over the coming months and I would encourage everyone with an interest to help to shape the future of those vital services. In addition, consultation will be undertaken on the island's connectivity plan, providing the opportunity for communities and stakeholders to also comment on those proposals. In relation to the wider network, I am aware that the Northern Isles ferry services contract is due to expire in 2028. Those services are different in nature to Chiff's and, as such, I can confirm that our current intention is for the next generation of that contract to be procured via the open market. Finally, I would like to conclude by thanking those, especially the communities, who continue to inform our plans for the future of Chiff's. I hope that the chamber can agree that, taken alongside the other initiatives that I have outlined this afternoon, Government ministers' preferred approach of a direct award would provide us with greater flexibility to drive improvement for the benefit of our island communities. If the minister will now take questions on the issues raised in her statement, I intend to allow up to 20 minutes, after which we will need to move on to the next item of business. Members wishing to ask a question who have not already done so should press the request to speak buttons and I call first Graham Simpson. Thank you. I thank the minister for advance sight of her statement. Islanders hoping for some clarity on how ferries will be run and by whom and for how long will be bewildered by what's just been said. Scotland's ferry system is not working, our ageing ferries are unreliable, the procurement and confused governance system is not fit for purpose. The minister says the status quo is not an option and I agree, but it's difficult to see how anything announced today is anything but the status quo. Perhaps the minister can explain how it is, because far from announcing a new model which would give hope to islanders, the minister has kicked the can down the road. She says she wants to explore a direct award to CalMac. With the current contract fast running out of time, maybe she feels that's the only route left. So how long does she want the next contract to run for, she didn't say. If a direct award isn't allowed, how quickly can a new tender process be completed? The minister has previously said that she believes that the tripartite structure should change. So why has she not made a decision on a new arrangement? Does she not recognise that any such change should go hand in hand with a new contract award? I thank the member for his questions. Clearly resilience and reliability are key to improving services and in terms of resilience, six new vessels by 2026 will help provide that resilience. In terms of the new contract, the new contract would be implemented from October next year. A tender arrangement would take much longer. Could a tender arrangement be achieved? Yes, it could, but only by extension of the existing contract, which would mean that the existing contract would last longer. It is the existing contract that we want to change to drive the improvements that we seek. On the governance arrangement, she is correct in saying that I want change. I said that to the member in this chamber only last week, but there is an order in which the decisions and the assessments need to take place to ensure that there is the logic of the financial, the legal and the other requirements that will be required to make sure that the final decision is a sensible one to meet the needs of the contract that we are also awarding. So there is an order to what we are doing, there is a comprehensive nature to what we are doing and I can assure you that I want change. I do not want to kick things down the can, which is exactly why I am changing the contract as of October next year. Should the due diligence allow us to do so before we make that final decision next summer? I would first like to welcome the statement from the transport minister. We believe that this is the correct way to move forward with a direct award of this contract. I know what the minister says that moving forward will not be business as usual, and again I welcome that statement. We know that islanders feel very badly let down and there has been many calls from islanders to have a greater role in the management and running of their lifeline services. Labour agrees with this, so what action will the Scottish Government take not just to consult islanders and staff but to ensure that they are much more involved and have a greater say in how these services are run and managed? Will there be places on the board of CalMac for islanders and trade unions? Finally, are you looking at a 10-year contract? I welcome the Labour Party's support for the direct award and the greater role of communities. That starts immediately in shaping the content of that new contract and that work starts now. That new contract would emerge regardless as to whether it was a direct award or indeed a tender. That work starts now. On the issue around islanders on boards, that has already started to happen, but I do think that there is more movement that can be taken. I am sympathetic to the point about trade union representation. Again, part of what I will need to do is to work with the organisations concerned in terms of the delivery and the change. There would need to be a number of changes in relation to the operation of CalMac and to be tech or compliant, so there would be a series of changes that would need to be made all at the same time. I do think that change starts now. I do not want to wait to see change happening years down the line. I want to see it happening and it can happen from next year if we follow the route. What will the Government now do through any directly awarded new contract to hold CalMac's senior management's feet to the fire, given the widely expressed concerns that under the existing contract the leadership of the company has at times felt remote from the communities that it serves? I think that the member makes a very important point, and he has been very assidious in pursuing this issue on behalf of his constituents. I do think that a direct award would allow a service delivery to be more flexible. I do think that in terms of the changes that are required, there needs to be a change in the management culture and ethos, relationships with key communities and indeed customers is critical to that. They are not just running a timetable, they must run a public service. I would reiterate that part of that director award should it be delivered would need to be a tech or compliant approach to their board of management, which would also involve government directly, and that would also support that approach, giving a more direct role and influence to do exactly what Alasdor Allan is asking for. The minister said that a direct award might not be welcomed by every community. There is good reason for that suspicion and nervousness. One of the benefits of the competitive tender process was that last time CalMac won this award they had to make 350 commitments of improvement as part of that contract. Can I first of all have all of those 350 commitments being delivered over the past five years? More important, will this new contract have very specific service delivery KPIs that come with penalties, as is the case with ScotRail, for example? The member makes a very important point on the detail of the 350. I will need to revert back in writing to the member, but that point about driving change is really important. Yes, KPIs, rather than in terms of the change in that will be about customer delivery and, importantly, customer experiences. I think that he is quite right to draw attention to the situation in ScotRail, which has a more focus on customer service in terms of what they are delivering. That is the kind of approach that I want to see in terms of the development of that contract that has those KPIs in it. That starts with my officials speaking to the communities that I spoke about just earlier on. That starts later this month. Thank you very much for signing off the service or to remind the chamber that my wife works part-time for CalMac. I welcome that statement, which I am sure will be welcomed by the CalMac staff. What assurances and benefits can the minister provide that the CalMac headquarters in Gwyrwch is secured? Will that statement have any implications on staffing at the headquarters today? If the contract is directly awarded to CalMac, I know that that would offer all CalMac staff the certainty and the stability that I know that the trade unions have been requesting. However, I need to be clear to the chamber the location of the headquarters. It is a matter for CalMac management. However, I do know, as I have heard directly in the chamber, that the Schuipman millon will continue to make the case for his constituency and his constituents on this matter. I, too, welcome the direct award. However, to run lifeline services, and they should always be run as public services, we need ferries that are fit for purpose. Will the cabinet secretary tell us when the Scottish Government will publish a ferry replacement programme in order to provide the lifeline services that our islands require? I repeat that the ferries that we are expecting would be the Glen Sannocks in Spring next year, with a view for service in the summer. Glen Rosa in May is the following year. For the Islay vessels, we are looking at October 2024 and February 2025. For the Little Minch vessels, we are looking at June 2025 and October 2025. She may be referring to the small vessel replacement programme, and I said in my statement that, as part of the islands connectivity plan, we will publish the long-term vessels and ports infrastructure plan. I think that that is what perhaps the member is talking about. That will be an update on what was produced in December last year, but that should give us some indication of not just the vessel replacement programme, but also on ports and harbours, because clearly that infrastructure is as important in making sure that we can continue that on-going investment to support the ferry service. The minister spoke of changing in the management culture, which is certainly long overdue. If there is a direct award to CalMac, can the minister advise what steps will be taken to ensure that it includes a duty to effectively engage and communicate with community representatives, deliver a greater customer focus and ethos, and a restructure of CalMac's management to one that clearly puts the travelling public first? I know the member who again has been very diligent in representing his constituents on that issue would be reassured that I would expect the contract. I do not want to prejudge what the community wants in that contract, but I would be surprised if the elements that he has just described were not in that contract, but let us see the work emerging from that. In terms of that new management culture emerging, it has to be supportive of customers and passengers. There has to be greater transparency in communications and on-relationship. In terms of delivering that, the community voice must be central to the future of that service. I think that the other aspect that is worth stressing is that currently CalMac is not a relevant authority on the Island Scotland 2018 Act 2018, and that would be something that we could be seeking to change. The minister knows that no new contract will overcome years of under-investment in the ferries, but will any new contract include better compensation arrangements for businesses, particularly on the islands, so that they are never left again high and dry with months and years of interrupted services? The pressures on businesses that were raised by Kenny Gibson—I first missed his questions that we have heard—is something that we continually hear because of the issues around reliability and resilience. Resilience is part of providing that continuity of service, and it will be much easier with six new vessels by 2026. Obviously, the implications of that should mean that there is a greater opportunity, particularly in winter months, where the overall and servicing of the dry docking of a number of vessels is required to take place from a safety point of view. That provides more stability for the service, so the questions and issues of compensation would not be something that we would expect in the future. However, I am acutely aware—not least as a former Cabinet Secretary for Tourism—that interruption of business has a severe impact on businesses. That is why I have also been talking to the current tourism minister about what support could be given, particularly to help to generate more and supportive businesses and, indeed, promotion of tourism once we know that the reliability and resilience of that service can be resumed. Willie Coffey, to be followed by Donald Cameron. Last time Transport Scotland received only one compliant bid for the Clyde and Hebrides ferry contract. What determines whether or not a bid is compliant and what due diligence does the Scottish Government undertake to arrive at its determination? I think that our decision is not to go for a tender. The issue in terms of the last tender was in a different market condition as well, but even at that stage there were issues around the minimum technical financial legal requirements for participants. If it does go to tender, they are clearly specified in the pre-qualification phase and are subject to the specific requirements being tendered. Wherever any aspect is found, either not to meet the specified or criteria requirements set out in the tender documentation, then that bid may be deemed as non-compliant. Before rejecting any bid as non-compliant, the specific circumstances would be carefully considered, but that is not the route that we are taking at this stage. Under the existing contract, it is island communities who continue to suffer from problems in our ferry service. The minister may be aware that there will be no Monday sailings from Colonsey to the mainland for the duration of the winter timetable. Effectively, a 25 per cent reduction in services over 21 weeks. What action will the minister take to ensure that Colonsey residents have access to a full service during this period? That is not a direct question on the statement that I have made today, but I am happy to try and address it. I too was concerned to hear the news that he has in terms of that disruption. Again, that is an issue related to resilience and the winter service that is required for the servicing of vessels during the dry dock and their servicing period. I was somewhat amused to hear and see as quoted now, I may be wrong, the quote may be incorrect, that decisions have been made on behalf of Transport Scotland and Biproxima of Government as to whether, for example, some kind of passenger plane or some kind of charter could help to provide resilience. I have asked my officials to look further into this, and I would say that the island connectivity plan will be looking at wider connectivity issues. For example, in Orkney, we have been asked by the council whether they could use some of their ferry funding, which is obviously council run, but we support the revenue for that. Could they use that for replacement for some flights in some circumstances? Obviously, as we move to more renewable and sustainable flights, that might become increasingly an option in some areas. I appreciate the point. I cannot give a direct answer, but I am aware of it. Keith Brown to be followed by Ariane Burgess. Can I thank the minister for her statement and also commend her on the intention to have a direct award if she manages to achieve that? She will be the first transport minister to do so, all previous Governments, having not been able to do that, and I speak as a person that let the last contract. Obviously, the contract is a very important step in the future of ferry provision on the west coast, but while the details in the process have been decided upon, there are, of course, still ferry services that island communities rely on. I am very encouraged by the minister by saying that she intends that these improvements should start now. Can she say anything further than what she has already said on steps that the Government will take to ensure improvements in service and the resilience of the fleet in advance of the contract being led? I believe in continuous improvement. On that later point, it was the direct intervention of the cabinet secretary that led to the consulted upon change to the winter programme for resilience to ensure that no one community would be left without a service for any extended period of time, which had been the experience previously. That attempt to continuous improvement has had a direct impact already. He makes the point about other ministers who may have sought to do this. I don't know if he said that I was brave or not, but we are not through this yet. This is the first part of a two-part process, but in terms of my determination for change, the due diligence exercise that will be conducted by experts to advise us on that final position is really important. Until we get that due diligence, I cannot give you a final decision, but it will be a final decision that will lead to improvements sooner rather than later. Can I thank the minister for her considerable work on making improvements in our ferry services? Earlier this week, CalMac published its annual vessel overhaul plans and announced a three-week increase in the number of overhaul days for its ageing fleet. What insurances can the minister give to rural and island communities that progress on maintenance will be closely monitored and how will a direct contract award in the future ensure that the voice of the rural and island communities that depend on those services is heard and responded to? Winter resilience and maintenance is critical to the service. That is an issue that may or may not be addressed in terms of the terms of contract. However, CalMac recognises that this winter's overhaul is particularly pressured. It represents a challenge to communities and staff in managing the various periods when vessels are out of service because they are getting their annual overhaul. However, the position will improve with the delivery of the new tonnage. We have the six new vessels coming through and we are obviously in terms of the charter of the MV Alfred for another further six-month period has been provided to help to provide that additional support during the services for the remainder of the overhaul period. As I mentioned in my answer to Mr Gibson, I want the community voice to be central in the future of the service, and I think that that is an important future role of the various community board. I will try to get into two further members who want to speak. Just to advise the chamber, the clock is not correct, so we should be finishing at 18.40. I will allow the questions, but they need to be brief as do the responses. First Katie Clark, then Douglas Lamestine. I refer to my register of members' interests relating to attendance at trade union events and welcome this statement. Could the minister confirm the role of the specialist advisors in on-going work to explore a direct award? Ernst and Young failed to involve trade unions in their work for project Neptune, so can she confirm the role of these private consultants and will they be consulting unions, islanders or others over a legally compliant direct award, given their importance to this? Thank you, Presiding Officer. I hope that we are not running to 18.40, but we will see the timing on this. Katie Clark makes an important point, because the issue in the due diligence is in relation to legal and accounting aspects, and particularly to constitutional arrangements that may or may not be required. I can reassure the member that, depending on decision time, I am due to meet with the trade unions this evening to discuss my announcement today. Thank you, Presiding Officer. We have heard that the Northern Ireland contract runs to 2028 and will go to open market, but the CalMac contract is direct award. Minister, why the difference? Because they are quite different contracts, and in terms of the services that they provide, obviously the NFS services are much longer, there are fewer services, and indeed in terms of the provision that they provide, I think that the NFS contract should be available for tender in the future. That is a current decision, but obviously as we approach 2028, we will be making a final decision about that, but I think that the experience of it, both at the time of the original tender and in terms of their experience, is a different service. I think that the CHIFS service would benefit from that TECO compliant direct award. That is why we are pursuing the due diligence and the steps that are needed to develop that new contract and to deliver the changes that we all want to see. Thank you, Minister. That concludes this item of business. There will be a brief pause before we move to the next item of business to allow front benches to change.