Sent by e-mail 19th March 2006
Letter to Dunoon Observer
Ourattention has been drawn to politicalliterature circulating in Argyll and Bute"Lyon Backs Kay ProposalsforGourock-Dunoon Ferry" and claims that in 2004 the Executive agreed to "implement the Kay proposals"
There are no "Kay proposals". It must be presumed that thepolitical circularis referringto an FSB/DGFGreport NeilKay co-authoredin 2004 with the other signatories to thisletter.
The Executive's proposalsbear no resemblance to the proposalswe put forward then.
We did not proposea tender procedure for the route, we did not propose limiting the secondoperator to a six year contract, we did not proposediscriminatingagainst any(unsubidised) second operator by imposingrestrictionson it that are not imposedon Western on the same route, andwe did not recommenddelaying the processsuch that 15 months later the Executivestill has not announcedwhat further restrictionswill be imposedon any such operator.
Wedidnot recommendthatthe Executive should have private discussionsand correspondencewith Western Ferriesin 2004 and 2005 aboutpossible implementationof its "Users Charter", which (as Western has made clear),is what it would offerin theevent of its becoming monopoly operator of vehicle-carrying on theroute.
These are all part and parcel ofwhat the Executive is, or has been, proposing for the route. We did not recommendthese steps, because not only are theyunnecessary,they willactively dictate againstany chance of getting a secondoperator on the route, and indeedit is questionablewhetherwhat the Executive has doneis even consistentwith guidelinesissued by theCommission in thiscontext.
For whatever reason,the restrictions and barriersto entry for any secondoperator imposed by the Executive at present, and under any of its proposed options for the route, mean there is no chanceof gettingany genuine competition in thismarket under theExecutive's proposals.
That being the case, eventually Western's traffic (and profits) will become so bloated at Hunters Quay and McInroys Pointthat it will be worthbuildingthe secondlinkspan at McInroys Point that it now has planningpermission for. However, it will only run afew peak period extraservicesto Dunoon Pier to relieve pressure at Hunters Quay,why should it pay charges at Dunoon Pier when it can use its own linkspan free of chargesat Hunters Quay?
OtherwiseDunoon Pier and the £8mill Breakwater and linkspan town centrefacilities will lie unused, except for onestreaker andan Ali Cat or (more likely) two Ali Cats orequivalent. This will be disastrousfor users, the community,the taxpayer, town centre development and integratedtransport, not juston thisside of the Clyde but over in Gourock. The proposed(and delayed) multi-million pound ferry-rail-bus Gourock Transport Interchangeis notgoing to be viableon theback of a few ferry foot passengers.
A shambles? Absolutely. Unnecessary? Again, absolutely, thisis a public service route which the EuropeanCommissionrecognises enables the Executive to regulatethe behaviour of all operators on the routein the public interest, but such regulation must be even-handed and non-discriminatory.
So is the further degradation of the route andeffectively a multi-million pound Western monopoly inevitable? In principle no, in practiceif present policies persistthere will be nothingto stop it. Why that shouldbe the case, you have to ask the Executivebecause they have not toldus.
ProfessorNeilKay, Captain Sandy Ferguson, Ronnie Smith CA
1