Write To Reply
Readers comments from our February 2012 edition
Comment:
I am astonished at the negative coverage in this month’s ‘Arran Voice’ of the Scottish Government’s ‘Draft Plan for Consultation’ on the Scottish Ferry services. This is exactly what it says it is – a consultation, so any negative views will of course be taken into consideration before any final decisions are made. However, for perhaps the very first time, the needs of island and rural communities in Scotland are being thoroughly examined and the prospect of a comprehensive overhaul of ferry services along the lines of Scandinavian models, including the introduction of RET and major financial investment on Arran, is at last in sight.
John Baraclough’s litany of complaint seems to centre on the design and capacity of the proposed two ferries, and the continuation of the use of Ardrossan as the destination port. However, the draft document states quite clearly that the change to a two – vessel system would take place either as part of the CHFS tender or the vessel renewal programme that will be contained within the Final Ferries Plan. By all means raise the difficulties of present vessels, but do not assume that these existing ferries will be the vessels of the future. I would hope that the new vessels will not only be more fit for purpose, but also more environmentally friendly and economical to run. In Scandinavia, more and more ferries are being run on biogas, and the latest Calmac ferries to be commissioned are hybrid vessels, the first low – carbon, battery – powered seagoing passenger ferries in the world. Not only that, but they are being built here on the Clyde, at Ferguson Shipbuilders in Port Glasgow.
As far as the complaint about Ardrossan is concerned, by all means raise the issues, but it would be a very blinkered approach indeed to assert that the £14 million investment should be spent in Ardrossan or Fairlie instead of Brodick. No one can surely contend that the present situation at the ferry terminal is acceptable or sustainable or even safe, and I for one welcome this major investment in upgrading our ferry terminal, linkspan and surrounding infrastructure in preparation for the further investment in our island economy that RET undoubtedly represents. At last there will be a 21st century approach to island living, tourism and sustainable development.
Where I do agree with John Baraclough is in his comments about the Ferry Committee, and in the interests of democracy, transparency and accountability, I would certainly propose a root and branch overhaul of this organisation, and see no reason why this should not happen in tandem with the improvements being mooted in the consultation document.
I do hope that many Arran residents will respond to the consulation and that many relevant points will be raised. However, we should at least be recognising the very positive developments and financial investments that are taking place and seize the opportunity to improve our ferry services and bring them at long last into the modern age.
John Bruce, Corrie, 1/2/12
Comment:
Re – John Baraclough’s opinion
John is going a bit OTT when he suggests that two Finlaggans are required as our old chum the Saturn can carry 531 passengers. ‘guid gear comes in sma’ bulk’
Ian McCallum.
