Shipyards: Economic Growth

Jamie Stone Excerpts
Tuesday 18th March 2025

(2 days, 23 hours ago)

Westminster Hall
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.

Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Patricia Ferguson Portrait Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow West) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I look forward to serving under your leadership this afternoon, Ms Jardine. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Glenrothes and Mid Fife (Richard Baker) for securing this debate and for an interesting, passionate opening speech. I also congratulate him and everyone involved in securing the Methil yard to make sure that there are jobs, opportunities and of course ships in future.

It is often said the Clyde built Glasgow and Glasgow built the Clyde. To anyone familiar with our city, that is more than just an expression: it is a way of describing the relationship that Glaswegians have with the Clyde. For centuries, it was a major shipbuilding river with some 30,000 ships built in yards in Glasgow and along the 116 miles of the Clyde. The expression “Clyde built” was synonymous with quality and was one that Glaswegians were particularly proud of. With the decline in shipbuilding, a major source of work, industry and pride was taken from the city.

As we have heard, the latest blow was delivered just this week when Ferguson Marine, established in 1903 and the last yard on the lower Clyde, lost out to a Polish company on a contract to build seven electric ferries for CalMac. Ferguson is a Scottish Government-owned company. It has been at the centre of controversy following delays and overruns in the construction of two new, much larger, ferries for CalMac. The contract for the Glen Sannox and Glen Rosa was originally awarded in 2015. It was not until January 2025 that the Glen Sannox was put into service.

I will skip the bit about a First Minister of Scotland launching a ferry in 2017, when it was incomplete and had portholes painted on.

Patricia Ferguson Portrait Patricia Ferguson
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I was going to skip it because I thought I would save the blushes of the SNP Members present but, as none is present, I will carry on. It was the indignity of indignities perhaps to see a First Minister of Scotland launching a ferry with portholes painted on—something that was drawn attention to at the time, but did not seem to faze her. Perhaps we should have learned that the person in question was unembarrassable.

However, just last week, the ferry in question, brought into service in January 2025, was found to have a crack in the hull. Fortunately, that seems to have been overcome and the ferry is back in service. However, the award of the contract to a Polish company is very disappointing, as the contract for the seven new, smaller ferries was seen as a way of allowing Ferguson Marine to move forward, to put its troubles behind it and to build the kind of ships that it has expertise in doing. It was also a way to ensure the continuation of shipbuilding on the Clyde and the preservation of the jobs of the workers there.

As my hon. Friend the Member for Inverclyde and Renfrewshire West (Martin McCluskey) said yesterday, CalMac’s decision is incredibly disappointing and is a result of the Scottish Government failing to provide a direct award to the yard. That should never have been allowed to happen. Now no workers in Scotland, let alone Inverclyde, will benefit from those contracts. My hon. Friend was absolutely right to say that. By way of contrast, I will just mention that, in Stavanger last week, on a visit with the Scottish Affairs Committee, I saw a new electric ferry built in Norway, for Norway.

We have heard about the difficulties that many of our island communities have in reaching the mainland. We have heard about the issues that islanders have in accessing appointments and going about their business in the way most of the rest of us who do not live in island communities expect to, but an additional problem is caused by the age of our ferry fleet. People on the islands find it very difficult to go about their business island to island. The interconnectedness of our islands is suffering, too.

In my constituency of Glasgow West and stretching across the Clyde into Glasgow South West, we have BAE Systems, which makes the Type 26 frigate, which is highly rated around the world and highly adaptable, too. As well as contracts with the Ministry of Defence for eight frigates, Australia and Canada have chosen that particular frigate for their fleets and work is ongoing to try to secure a major contract with Norway, which would be hugely significant for both countries in terms of not just the export of the frigate itself, but what it would mean to our relationship and the defence of the two nations.

Last year, I visited BAE Systems’ new training academy, built at a cost of some £15 million. BAE recognised that skills in areas such as welding were in short supply in the UK and has set about training the workers of the future, as well as upskilling existing workers, and training the leaders of the future. The state of the art academy is teaching 200 young people every year about project management, the management of cranes and welding, to name but a few of the jobs that people are being prepared for. The way in which innovative technology is used in the academy is remarkable. The young people I met that day are clearly relishing the opportunities they have.

Obviously, BAE Systems is training the workers it needs for the future—men and women, to take the point made by the hon. Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello)—but I would be surprised if some of the skills acquired in the academy were not also utilised in our green energy transition, and in the transition towards low-emission ships and sustainable and environmentally friendly maritime technology. It is clear to me that those young people will ensure that the term “Clyde-built” will continue to be a designation denoting high quality for decades to come.

--- Later in debate ---
Jamie Stone Portrait Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD)
- Hansard - -

It is a pleasure to speak in any debate chaired by your good self, Ms Jardine.

I, too, note that a certain political party from Scotland is not present today, which is a disgrace. Let us think about what it would be like to be working in Ferguson’s right now. Through no fault of the workforce—there is nothing wrong with their skills—they have been left out, which is pretty bad, and not one of those Members bothers to show up. I would not let them run a birthday party in a brewery, if I can put it that way.

Nevertheless, we have had good news about the frigates that are going to be built in Scotland. I suggest that there will probably be a greater necessity to build more of them, and I imagine that that work could come to Scotland. We have the skills and we should be proud of that.

When I was growing up in the highlands, there was a dismal litany of depopulation. When I was at Tain Royal academy, the brightest and best—and many others— went south. Indeed, my father said to me, “Go south, young lad, to work and to prosper.” But then the oil came. I give credit to the then Labour Government for seeing the potential of North sea oil and for lifting the ball and running with it, because those crucial decisions in the early 1970s created the industry that we have today.

Because of where the potential yards were situated, and the need to get them to the North sea, it made sense to build them in the Outer Hebrides, Kishorn, Ardersier and Nigg. In the early 1970s, we saw the transfer of the skills that have already been mentioned from the Clyde and other parts of the UK. Those skills moved north to build the mighty structures that we have today in the North sea.

I worked in the Kishorn yard on the Ninian Central Platform, which in its day was the biggest concrete structure ever built, and in the Nigg yard for a number of years. At the height of North sea construction and fabrication, no less than 5,000 people worked in the Nigg yard. Hon. Members can imagine what a difference that made to the local economy of that remote part of the highlands—depopulation disappeared just like that.

People moved in. We made jokes about them—no offence to hon. Members from the west of Scotland—and called them Hey Jimmys, because they all came in saying, “Hey Jim!” They got my name right, because I am James, which was rather charming. It was a shot in the arm to see, in my home town of Tain, people coming in from south-west Scotland and other parts. What that meant in terms of amateur operatic societies, and just doing things in the community, was a great change—very much for the good. I remember those days with great happiness: I married and I brought up my children because of the employment in those yards. That was why I did not move away and why I disobeyed my father’s instructions.

More recently, as has been mentioned, we have seen the potential of floating offshore structures. As I have said, the Nigg yard where I worked was placed where it was because it was in one of the finest deep-water ports in the United Kingdom, where big structures could be built and moved relatively easily out to the North sea. For that reason, I am grateful to the Government for the announcement in the last few days that £55 million will be given to the port of Cromarty firth to develop an alongside fabrication facility to create and put together those modular structures that can then be taken out. I thank the Government for that very welcome decision.

From that investment, we can do great things in future, but I also suggest that time is of the essence. The skills mentioned by the hon. Member for Glasgow West (Patricia Ferguson) are ageing. If they are lost, they could be gone forever, because they are clever skills such as butt welding and all the different sorts of fabrication in steel, aluminium or concrete. In getting ahead with what we are doing now, we will be in the nick of time to train up new generations based on past generations’ knowledge and ability. I welcome that.

This has been a well-tempered debate—apart from the conspicuous absence of some hon. Members—which sends a good message to everybody who cares about our shipbuilding industry. Everyone is singing from the same hymn sheet, which is to be welcomed because, as others hon. Members said, it was shipbuilding that made this country great. We have the skills and the people, and we can do it again, but this time with offshore and other similar structures.

If a Government Member would like to visit my constituency to see what we are going to do, they would be more than welcome—to say the least. I may be in a different party, but I extend the hand of friendship. I know that a visit would mean a great deal to the local people.

--- Later in debate ---
Sarah Jones Portrait The Minister for Industry (Sarah Jones)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Glenrothes and Mid Fife (Richard Baker) on securing such an important debate. I thank him for quoting Donald Dewar in the first speech of the Scottish Parliament in 1998. I worked in an office next to Donald Dewar for a couple of years and he was an incredible man. He also said in that speech:

“We are fallible. We will make mistakes. But we will never lose sight of what brought us here: the striving to do right by the people of Scotland; to respect their priorities; to better their lot; and to contribute to the commonweal.”

The debate this afternoon has shown that many Members are carrying on in that spirit and acting in that way on behalf of their constituents.

One of the first issues that crossed our desks when we came to power last July was the challenge with Harland and Wolff. We were faced with a dilemma: if we had, as the shadow Minister suggested, thrown money immediately at the problem, we would have been throwing good money after bad. That was clear to anybody who had any sight of what was happening, but it was also clear that we were in a perilous position and we wanted to make sure that the Government could do whatever they could to save all four yards. There was a big push, for a number of reasons including the contracts that existed, to think about Belfast, and not to think about the four yards together.

A collective piece of work was done in which I played a small part and my hon. Friends the Members for Glenrothes and Mid Fife and for Na h-Eileanan an Iar (Torcuil Crichton), who has the Arnish port in his constituency, as well as the Secretaries of State for Northern Ireland, Scotland and Defence and my boss the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, played a large part. They all wanted to make sure we could do some kind of deal. When I was sat in the Ministry of Defence with Navantia, we were scratching our heads and thinking, “What on earth needs to be done here?” It was a big piece of work, with a lot of hard work around the clock from officials. The Prime Minister intervened because he saw the importance of this good piece of work. My hon. Friend the Member for Glenrothes and Mid Fife made the important point that we did not want to do this work out of a sense of charity. It was because the people at Methil, in his case, are enormously skilled, offering the possibility of future contracts and operations.

We did not see it as charity; we saw it as protecting the talent we have in this country, and wanting to see it grow. When I had the privilege of going to Methil to meet and talk to some of the 200 workers, 50 of whom are apprentices, it was apparent that this was a place—though cold—where we built the things that defined the 20th century, and can also be where we build the things that will define the decades to come. It is important to keep that in mind.

I want to touch on an issue many hon. Members raised about the Scottish Government, procurement and the award going to a Polish shipyard. I was talking to my hon. Friend the Member for Inverclyde and Renfrewshire West (Martin McCluskey) about that earlier today. He questioned why Poland had been chosen over Port Glasgow, which was a good question to ask. I know Anas Sarwar has also been asking questions. I heard the intervention about phase 2, and perhaps there is something to be pulled and gained from this, though what has transpired is a shame.

There is a question about procurement, which both we and the Minister for Defence Procurement are looking at. We will keep doing that, including considering the Procurement Act 2023. I will soon be talking to that Minister, not only in this area but on steel, to see what more we can do.

Jamie Stone Portrait Jamie Stone
- Hansard - -

I thank the Minister for giving way. On that point, I do not know how well I can put this. In building offshore structures, different bits can be built in different places, but they would come to Invergordon to be amalgamated, hence the £55 million Government investment. Could the same principle apply of looking at the rules, to ensure that the different bits are built in Methil or Ardersier, rather than being built abroad? Because that is our fear, that they may be made far away in somewhere such as Poland or Korea.

Sarah Jones Portrait Sarah Jones
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the hon. Member for that intervention. He mentioned the importance of the £55 million that has gone to Cromarty Firth. Of course, we need to ensure, when looking at supply chains in whatever the industry, we do what we can to rebuild British jobs. In quite a few of our manufacturing industries over recent years, we have seen a slow decline, which we are keen to turn around.

I am working on the steel strategy, where we have a £2.5 billion fund that we committed to in the general election, on top of the £500 million that will be going, if delivered, to the Port Talbot work with Tata. That is a lot of taxpayers’ money; we want to ensure we are spending it wisely and that we are using the levers of Government, whether in procurement or other matters, to ensure that we are building as much as we can in the UK. We obviously have to be cognisant of laws around procurement and need to look at it carefully. It is an ambition of the Government that we make things in the UK and use supply chains here as much as possible.

I am sorry about the decision that was made in Scotland. I am also sorry that there is no one here from the SNP to make their case. We will do what we can with procurement to ensure we make the right decisions. We talked about shipbuilding and shipyards and the importance—