Professor criticises ‘1970s’ ferry links
Andy Philip
Ferry links in Scotland were yesterday compared to those of a "less developed country" by an expert in maritime transport.
Professor Alf Baird said vessels were out of date and did not link properly to mainland train or bus connections.
The claim was made as the manager of a major ferry operator warned that half of its ports will need work soon to keep them in a safe condition.
Professor Baird, of Napier University, told MSPs on a Scottish Parliament committee that routes across the country should be opened to tender and urged government to "get out" of shipping.
Mr Baird, who lives in Orkney, said he had been on business in Norway - and claimed the Scandinavian country provided better privatised infrastructure.
He described "excellent" covered terminals and efficient ferries compared to "old rolling stock" trains arriving at an open-air Gourock port where a "1970s" ferry was waiting. It's like a less developed country - I kid you not. And that's what we have to get over," he said.
He made the claim to Holyrood's Transport Committee which is conducting an inquiry into ferry services in Scotland. A European Community investigation, which could take up to 18 months, will look at how all Caledonian MacBrayne's ferry routes have been supported by the public purse.
Another witness to give evidence included professor Neil Kay of Strathclyde University who believes an independent ferry regulator should be set up to avoid sea routes being put out to tender.
The committee also heard from Guy Platten, managing director of Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd, which operates 21 ports.
Asked what problems faced Scottish infrastructure, he said: "Quite a few of our harbours need improvements so they stay safe.
"Of 21 harbours I'd say in at least 50% of them there's a requirement to spend additional money than was first envisaged."
© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.
Posted by: subrosa on 11:39pm Tue 6 May 08
Here we go again:
[italic]"Of 21 harbours I'd say in at least 50% of them there's a requirement to spend additional money than was first envisaged."[/italic]
Do these folk think the taxpayers are bottomless pits? They're a profit making business and ought to use their profits to ensure their business is safe.
Here we go again:
"Of 21 harbours I'd say in at least 50% of them there's a requirement to spend additional money than was first envisaged."
Do these folk think the taxpayers are bottomless pits? They're a profit making business and ought to use their profits to ensure their business is safe.
Posted by: Colin B, Bearsden on 12:32am Wed 7 May 08
CAlmac exists primarly for the benefit of for its lazy staff not for its users eg sunday sailings- the slip staff at Largs are awful, ticket staff slow and Gourock maintenance of ferry access/ so poor we all to often have to walk off the long way round, frequencies are poor but what do you expect when the board is also dominated by old buffers and poorly educated , inexpereinced types
Not helped by Ross Finnie and Tavish Scott messing up the tender process- spent a lot of money and got the wrong result
CAlmac exists primarly for the benefit of for its lazy staff not for its users eg sunday sailings- the slip staff at Largs are awful, ticket staff slow and Gourock maintenance of ferry access/ so poor we all to often have to walk off the long way round, frequencies are poor but what do you expect when the board is also dominated by old buffers and poorly educated , inexpereinced types
Not helped by Ross Finnie and Tavish Scott messing up the tender process- spent a lot of money and got the wrong result
Posted by: Donald Anderson, glasgow on 5:34am Wed 7 May 08
Give Ross and Tavish jobs in the ticket office after they lose their current jobs.
Give Ross and Tavish jobs in the ticket office after they lose their current jobs.
Posted by: Lobeydosser, Woodlands Road on 6:55am Wed 7 May 08
Donald - no chance they'll mess that up too!
Public money or privatised; I do not really care, but it need s fixed ASAP. Gourock terminal - a shambles, often no direct exit from the station, no covered walk way, open to the elements and for the West of Scotland that means getting wet - or is all of this part of the ferry experience? The Ardrossan terminal is worse.
Where are all our ferry terminals - are on the west and north, and where does the weather come from - the west, what's there the Atlantic, and what does it bring - rain. Covered walk-ways?
Donald - no chance they'll mess that up too!
Public money or privatised; I do not really care, but it need s fixed ASAP. Gourock terminal - a shambles, often no direct exit from the station, no covered walk way, open to the elements and for the West of Scotland that means getting wet - or is all of this part of the ferry experience? The Ardrossan terminal is worse.
Where are all our ferry terminals - are on the west and north, and where does the weather come from - the west, what's there the Atlantic, and what does it bring - rain. Covered walk-ways?
Posted by: ferryman, Renfrewshire on 8:34am Wed 7 May 08
Is this the same Professor Alf Baird from Napier University who is determined to see CalMac privatisated at any cost? Did he also mention that he attended a SUSTRANET meeting in November 2006 with other private ferry operators who attacked CalMac at every opporunity? (CalMac was not invited to the meeting) The outcome of that meeting was to lodge an official complaint to the EC.
Professor Baird's comments to the MSPs are bang out of order as it's pretty obvious he is very biased against CalMac, and wants to see it broken up to please his friends in the private ferry sector.
Is this the same Professor Alf Baird from Napier University who is determined to see CalMac privatisated at any cost? Did he also mention that he attended a SUSTRANET meeting in November 2006 with other private ferry operators who attacked CalMac at every opporunity? (CalMac was not invited to the meeting) The outcome of that meeting was to lodge an official complaint to the EC.
Professor Baird's comments to the MSPs are bang out of order as it's pretty obvious he is very biased against CalMac, and wants to see it broken up to please his friends in the private ferry sector.
Posted by: ferryman, Greenock on 8:45am Wed 7 May 08
[quote][bold]subrosa[/bold] wrote:
Here we go again: [italic]"Of 21 harbours I'd say in at least 50% of them there's a requirement to spend additional money than was first envisaged."[/italic] Do these folk think the taxpayers are bottomless pits? They're a profit making business and ought to use their profits to ensure their business is safe.[/quote] If CalMac was making a profit then they wouldn't need public subsidy, don't they?
The truth is, many of CalMac's routes are loss-making so they don't make much money. This is because they serve for the benefit of island communities, not greedy shareholders who demand big profits.
You only have to see at Britain's privatised railways to see where it has gone horribly wrong. Same thing [italic]will[/italic] happen if CalMac routes are broken up and taken over by private ferry operators.
subrosa wrote:
Here we go again: "Of 21 harbours I'd say in at least 50% of them there's a requirement to spend additional money than was first envisaged." Do these folk think the taxpayers are bottomless pits? They're a profit making business and ought to use their profits to ensure their business is safe.
If CalMac was making a profit then they wouldn't need public subsidy, don't they?
The truth is, many of CalMac's routes are loss-making so they don't make much money. This is because they serve for the benefit of island communities, not greedy shareholders who demand big profits.
You only have to see at Britain's privatised railways to see where it has gone horribly wrong. Same thing
will happen if CalMac routes are broken up and taken over by private ferry operators.
Posted by: ferryman, Greenock on 8:50am Wed 7 May 08
[quote][bold]subrosa[/bold] wrote:
Here we go again: [italic]"Of 21 harbours I'd say in at least 50% of them there's a requirement to spend additional money than was first envisaged."[/italic] Do these folk think the taxpayers are bottomless pits? They're a profit making business and ought to use their profits to ensure their business is safe.[/quote] If CalMac was making a profit then they wouldn't need public subsidy, don't they?
The truth is, many of CalMac's routes are loss-making so they don't make much money. This is because they serve for the benefit of island communities, not greedy shareholders who demand big profits.
You only have to see at Britain's privatised railways to see where it has gone horribly wrong. Same thing [italic]will[/italic] happen if CalMac routes are broken up and taken over by private ferry operators.
subrosa wrote:
Here we go again: "Of 21 harbours I'd say in at least 50% of them there's a requirement to spend additional money than was first envisaged." Do these folk think the taxpayers are bottomless pits? They're a profit making business and ought to use their profits to ensure their business is safe.
If CalMac was making a profit then they wouldn't need public subsidy, don't they?
The truth is, many of CalMac's routes are loss-making so they don't make much money. This is because they serve for the benefit of island communities, not greedy shareholders who demand big profits.
You only have to see at Britain's privatised railways to see where it has gone horribly wrong. Same thing
will happen if CalMac routes are broken up and taken over by private ferry operators.
Posted by: spagan, heisker, scotland on 8:55am Wed 7 May 08
Point well made Ferryman
CalMac operates many routes that would never be profitable. Of course, Ullappool to Stornoway could make money for private shareholders. However all we would do is the same as we've done to the Royal Mail - leave all the awkward stuff to be done at a huge loss - with no more cross-subsidy from the profit-making parts.
As for CalMac staff - I've always found them to be great, friendly, obliging etc.
Slainte Mhor
Point well made Ferryman
CalMac operates many routes that would never be profitable. Of course, Ullappool to Stornoway could make money for private shareholders. However all we would do is the same as we've done to the Royal Mail - leave all the awkward stuff to be done at a huge loss - with no more cross-subsidy from the profit-making parts.
As for CalMac staff - I've always found them to be great, friendly, obliging etc.
Slainte Mhor
Posted by: awh, Dumfries on 9:38am Wed 7 May 08
One only has to look at Britains mix of nationalised track and private rail operators to see where it has gone right. The railways recently moved more people than at any time since the second world war and on less track. Compared with their slow starvation as a nationalised industry under the tories, they have gone through a renaissance in the past ten years.
Funny that investment from the nu- labour government plus private companies has started to undo decades of underinvestment. If tax payers can't or won't properly subsidise state industries then they are better off in a regulated private sector, and because ASLEF now have real clout wages for some in the industry are now much improved.
Compare Scotland's water infrastructure with that of England it is dreadfully underperforming because politicians won't make us pay the proper rate for our water, the same story with ferries. If we need ferries then we either need to pay more taxes for them or part privatise them it is that simple.
One only has to look at Britains mix of nationalised track and private rail operators to see where it has gone right. The railways recently moved more people than at any time since the second world war and on less track. Compared with their slow starvation as a nationalised industry under the tories, they have gone through a renaissance in the past ten years.
Funny that investment from the nu- labour government plus private companies has started to undo decades of underinvestment. If tax payers can't or won't properly subsidise state industries then they are better off in a regulated private sector, and because ASLEF now have real clout wages for some in the industry are now much improved.
Compare Scotland's water infrastructure with that of England it is dreadfully underperforming because politicians won't make us pay the proper rate for our water, the same story with ferries. If we need ferries then we either need to pay more taxes for them or part privatise them it is that simple.
Posted by: spagan, heisker, scotland on 11:18am Wed 7 May 08
I'm sure that you are correct awh - but a well funded nationalised service has to be better than what we have at present.
It would have been difficult for our train service to have got much worse pre-privatisation. However its not that the private sector has invested, its that the government have increased their subsidies dramatically.
We need huge levels of investment to have a service worthy of an extraordinarily rich country.
Some of our journey times are little better than Quenn Victoria's time.
Slainte Mhor
I'm sure that you are correct awh - but a well funded nationalised service has to be better than what we have at present.
It would have been difficult for our train service to have got much worse pre-privatisation. However its not that the private sector has invested, its that the government have increased their subsidies dramatically.
We need huge levels of investment to have a service worthy of an extraordinarily rich country.
Some of our journey times are little better than Quenn Victoria's time.
Slainte Mhor
Posted by: fbma marine, Cebu on 3:16pm Wed 7 May 08
I think what Pentalnd Ferries has achieved with bring in new modern tonnage shows what the private sector could do for some routes in Scotland
I think what Pentalnd Ferries has achieved with bring in new modern tonnage shows what the private sector could do for some routes in Scotland
Politics
INDEX
Comment | Read Comments (11)
