More than 10,000 ferry sailings cancelled due to faults
Freedom of information data obtained by the party showed 10,809 sailings were cancelled for this reason between the start of January 2023 and the end of April this year.
CalMac's ageing fleet of ferries has been plagued with maintenance issues in recent years, though it is hoped the arrival of new vessels such as the Glen Sannox, which joined the fleet in January, will alleviate the problem.
Lib Dem MSP Jamie Greene said: 'These figures reveal just how much chaos the SNP are causing island communities.
'Our island communities are being treated as second-class citizens, lacking the basic right to access the same public services as mainland Scots.
'The SNP's failure to deliver new lifeline ferries has anchored islanders with an aging fleet that is in constant need of repair, at constant risk of cancellation and costing millions in repair bills.
'My constituents on the west coast are suffering the depressing reality of losing business, missing events and hospital appointments and, frankly, they have lost faith in the Scottish Government's ability to fix those problems.'
CalMac said it is common for some sailings to be diverted to other ports due to weather or sea conditions.
The ferry operator said that on 294 days out of the time period, it operated more than the number of scheduled sailings.
A CalMac spokeswoman said: 'The figures clearly show that CalMac operated more than 95% of all planned sailings since 2023.
'In a typical day, we operate over 450 sailings and our staff work hard to provide a good service in challenging circumstances. In fact, poor weather remains the most common cause of disruption.
'In terms of technical problems, these do happen with an aging fleet and in increasingly challenging weather.
'However, the arrival of 13 new vessels by 2029, which started with MV Glen Sannox in January this year, will reduce these and modern vessels will improve the reliability and resilience of services across the whole network.'
A Transport Scotland spokesperson said: 'Between January 1, 2023 and April 30 2025, over 95% of the 391,139 scheduled sailings operated.
'We are investing in six, new, major vessels to serve Scotland's ferry network from early 2025, alleviating the need for extensive repairs on older vessels and improving reliability.
'Contracts have also been signed for a further seven, new, smaller vessels to serve the Clyde and Hebrides ferry network.
'CalMac are delivering services in increasingly challenging weather and the arrival of 13 new vessels by 2029, which started with MV Glen Sannox in January this year, will reduce technical issues and these modern vessels should also be able to operate in more challenging weather and sea conditions.
'To improve service in the short term, we have also purchased the MV Loch Frisa and chartered the MV Alfred. We continue to work with operators and CMAL to improve resilience across our networks.'
Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News
Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scotsman
an hour ago
- Scotsman
Why betting it all on offshore wind is a high-risk strategy for Scotland
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Zonal pricing, on which a remarkable number of instant experts have emerged over the past 48 hours, was always illusory as a route to cheaper electricity for Scotland or anywhere else. Harken, however, to Dave Doogan MP who is apparently the SNP's spokesman on the economy at Westminster, who tweeted: '[Energy Secretary] Ed Miliband has ruled out zonal pricing in the UK… Labour will never stand up for the people of Scotland. We need independence.' To emphasise his point, Mr Doogan accompanied his tweet with a crude montage of Mr Miliband wearing a Union Jack pith helmet. At least nobody can accuse Dave of subtlety – only of abysmal ignorance, not least about his own party's position on the subject. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Like many others, myself included, SNP ministers went through a learning curve on zonal pricing. It took them a bit longer due to the obvious attraction of any claim that Scotland is being done down. The fact opposition has been led by Scottish interests was a problem for that approach, though nobody seems to have told Dave. The lesson from the debate over zonal electricity pricing may be that building more wind turbines far away from population centres is not a good idea (Picture: William Edwards) | AFP via Getty Images SNP confusion about zonal pricing The case made by SSE, Scottish Power, Scottish Renewables, trade unions and many others was not all that complicated. If generators of power in Scotland were obliged to sell for a lower wholesale price because of location, they were less likely to attract the large-scale investment required to build offshore windfarms in the first place. Or, as Kate Forbes MSP – she's your deputy leader, Dave – put it: 'Zonal pricing is going to be hugely challenging as we could end up in the position where we don't get industrial opportunities and consumers don't get lower bills.' Asked directly if he still supported zonal pricing, John Swinney – being a bit more sleekit – refused to say yea or nay. But the Scottish Government's silence yesterday was deafening. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad While zonal pricing made headlines, there might have been greater significance elsewhere in Mr Miliband's statement on energy. The commitment to an overall review of wholesale pricing takes us to a starting point which should have been reached years ago. A coherent approach would have involved co-operation between Scottish and UK Governments, as well as the regulator Ofgem. None of that happened. The result is that we now have, particularly in Scotland, a catalogue of uncertainties, on which vast sums of money and dubious political assumptions depend. Zonal pricing would have added an additional uncertainty but taking it off the table does not mean the others have gone away. The need for reappraisal is urgent even if conclusions might be unpalatable. Importance of UK market I am a long-term supporter of renewable energy and when in government did my fair share to promote it. The Renewables Obligation was probably the most successful mechanism of its kind anywhere. Scotland was able to contribute disproportionately because of our onshore wind resource. But I also always argued for a balanced energy policy which is the crucial ingredient missing from current debate. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The blithe assumption that Scottish interests are best served by unlimited reliance on offshore wind needs to be challenged and scrutinised before further commitments are made. Mr Doogan and his ilk would do well to remember that Scottish renewables generation is based on the premise that there is an eager and willing market in the rest of Britain. That market has to be competed for, rather than taken for granted as one crucial sentence about the forthcoming review made clear: 'Reformed national pricing will send a clearer upfront signal ahead of the point of investment decision about the relative system value of investing in different locations, which can be accurately priced into those investment decisions.' Roughly translated, this points towards generating power closer to areas of highest demand. Or, as Professor Dieter Helm – a genuine expert – put it: 'Perhaps the real lesson from the zonal pricing debate is that some of the wind generation should not have been built in the north of Scotland in the first place, and perhaps not more should be built there now.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad That possibility cannot be dismissed lightly. Until there is a far clearer picture about the future pattern of generation, to serve the interests of net zero and lower bills, how much sense does it make to behave as if no such uncertainty exists? Turning Scottish backs on nuclear? Offshore wind developments on the scale envisaged only make sense if there is access to markets. Otherwise, we end up with billions in 'constraint payments' to generators who can't generate. Pump-storage hydro can mitigate that problem (and please let's get on with it) but only in part. Rationally, how much does the market actually need? Large-scale offshore wind is just as feasible around other parts of the UK which are far closer to population centres. As I write (albeit on a sunny day), solar is providing a third of Britain's electricity, which would not have been foreseen even a few years ago. A quarter of our power is coming in via interconnectors while wind accounts for just 2.3 per cent. My instincts tell me that much of the ScotWind programme may never be built because lower cost alternatives will emerge. We need to speed up these projects and also ensure recognition of their particular importance to peripheral areas where this is a one-off economic opportunity. Ofgem won't do that so politicians must. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad We must think again about whether it makes sense to run down gas or turn our Scottish backs on nuclear (in each case, the answer is 'no'). We still need a balanced energy policy in which Scottish renewables play a significant part.
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
A vote of no confidence in Labour council could happen
The dissatisfaction stems from the quality of the new civic leadership. To my mind, Portobello councillor Jane Meagher, only elected three years ago and now 73, doesn't seem entirely happy in the job. Her plaintive monologues at council meetings do nothing to dispel my notion that she would rather be doing anything than answering for a major local authority with a billion-pound budget and a perpetual crisis. Her deputy, the personable Morningside councillor Mandy Watt is the brains of the operation, but at times struggles to get her points across. Read more John McLellan: The inside story of the battle for control of Edinburgh What row over Edinburgh Tour de France bid shows - and it may not be what you think Edinburgh is held back by its can't do attitude. It should be more like Glasgow Those with the greatest regrets should be the Lib Dem councillors who were keenest for Cllr Meagher to take over, but it's a situation entirely resulting from their refusal to take over the administration when the opportunity presented itself, as this column explored last week. Remorseful or reluctant, it is the cause of much frustration amongst the Conservative group which can only watch helplessly as the Lib Dems are able to dictate budget priorities but then accept no responsibility for the outcomes, and Labour continuing to return reasonable levels of local support locally despite humiliation in Westminster and what they see as incompetence in delivering basic council services, particularly education and street maintenance. There is also what's been described as a ticking timebomb in social care, particularly residential care for young people, the subject of a damning report in 2022, and allegations that few, if any of its recommendations have been acted upon. Push is now coming to shove, and as the 14-strong Lib Dem group takes the summer to consider whether they will pull the plug on Labour's tenuous control, senior Conservatives are considering whether to force the issue by either tabling a motion of no confidence in the Labour administration or supporting a similar motion if proposed by either the SNP or Green parties. A plan to have Cammy Day voted in as planning convener could be the catalyst for change. (Image: Gordon Terris) The catalyst could be Labour's plan to have Cammy Day voted in as planning convener at the first council meeting after the summer recess, a move which does not command unanimous support in either the Labour group, never mind the Lib Dems or Tories. But even if the nomination is withdrawn, just the proposal could be enough to persuade enough councillors across the chamber that time should be called. Some in the Conservative group remain to be convinced, but after last week's column, one councillor spoke of fears that at current polling levels the group could be reduced from its current ten to as few as four or five at the 2027 elections. Whether it's because of a sense that something must be done, or there's nothing to left to lose, a Conservative-led vote of no confidence in the Labour administration is now a real possibility, and as it would almost certainly be supported by the SNP and Green groups, the administration would fall. Read more: Attempt to strip historic Vogue cinema's listed status thrown out Hospitality giant threatened with legal action for leaving Trainspotting pub 'to rot' Barrowland unveils 'ambitious' plans to alter famous facade The parties would then have until the next meeting in September to sort out new positions they could support, and if the Lib Dems insisted on refusing to take over, or Labour rejected a Lib Dem administration, the blame for letting in the SNP-Greens could not be laid at the Tories door, as some fear it might, forgetting that voters seem happy to support the Lib Dems despite facilitating the SNP budget at Holyrood.
The Herald Scotland
3 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Scottish Greens at the crossroads – principle or pragmatism?
Fergus Ewing, the former SNP Minister, previously dismissed them as 'wine-bar revolutionaries'. To each and every taunt, Green politicians tend to respond with a gentle, faintly supercilious smile. Read More: In truth, the most fervent advocates of Greenery can occasionally seem a mite smug. Like religious adherents, they can sometimes give the impression that their path is the way to truth, while others are self-deluded. Only very occasionally, mind. And they mean well. They genuinely believe, as they set out in their 2024 election manifesto, that 'we are hurtling towards climate hell.' Such a conclusion tends to lessen the scope for nuanced politics. But, alongside that, there is also an intriguing conundrum confronting the Scottish Greens right now as they elect their next leaders and contemplate the pending Holyrood elections. Are they content to be, principally, a party of voluble protest? Or is there pragmatism too – an opportunity to cut deals with other parties, such as the SNP or Labour, in pursuit of interim Green objectives? As The Herald has ably chronicled, there are those in the party who argue that the Greens must present a fully radical agenda, who distrust Holyrood compromise, including the Bute House pact previously struck by the retiring leadership. Equally, though, there are prominent Greens who lampoon such talk as 'heroic Bolshevik insurgency' – which achieves precisely nothing for the people of Scotland. Politics is frequently a question of balancing principle, pragmatism and power. Just ask those Labour MPs who found it impossible to back their leader's demands for welfare cuts. Again, commonly, that balance becomes trickier as a party gains more salience. It is relatively easy to be pure of thought when what you say and do is immaterial. That tends to change when there is the prospect that your contribution could alter Parliamentary arithmetic, could advance or thwart legislation, could sustain or oust a government. Then you have to choose. To compromise. You have to acknowledge that you cannot implement every line of your manifesto. Not least because the people did not vote for you in sufficient numbers. Be clear. The Greens will not abandon principle. They will still, on occasion, sport that knowing smile. But perhaps they may once more seek a mandate to enter negotiations with others. Is that feasible? Are the Greens not burned by Humza Yousaf's abrupt decision as First Minister to end the Bute House pact and kick them out of government? Seems not. One senior source dismissed the notion that they were 'nursing some raw fury at the SNP.' I was told that there is a good 'transactional' relationship with Team Swinney, as evidenced by the negotiations over the Scottish Government budget. The Greens know that John Swinney does not share their overall outlook. For example, he believes firmly in pursuing GDP economic growth while they do not, insisting that was excluded from the Bute House deal. First Minister John Swinney (Image: PA) And, yes, perhaps the relationship with Nicola Sturgeon was deeper. She is arguably closer to the Green perspective. After all, in a lecture, she previously set out the concept of assessing 'well-being', rather than simply economic wealth. But it seems the Greens could still work with John Swinney, where necessary. There is, I was told, 'sufficient mutual trust and respect.' There could also be a deal with Labour, arithmetically. But core Labour policies might be problematic – not least their eager advocacy of nuclear power. For now, the SNP seem more likely partners. After all, both parties support Scottish independence. Albeit with differing degrees of vigour. Frankly, I do not believe that Green politicians get up in the morning with the first thought that they must end the Union. Their waking focus is on the environment and climate change. Still, the Greens insist that they back independence, placing it in the context of those environmental aims. They say that an independent Scotland would be better placed to alter energy policy and tackle the climate crisis. And there is another thought lurking at the back of Green minds. They note that John Swinney has faced a degree of internal SNP criticism from those who believe he is not sufficiently fervent in pursuing independence. One source suggested to me that this might present an opportunity for the Greens to highlight their independence credentials. Frankly, to prise votes from the SNP. However, as with Mr Swinney, it seems the Greens want to get away from discourse over the independence process. To build support instead for the proclaimed advantages of the notion. Again, though, the Greens will not shed their iconoclastic image. They will continue to position themselves as challenging the wealthy establishment. An opportunity to do that presents itself with President Trump's possible Scottish visit. Many leading politicians will be torn between mounting protests and arguing Scotland's interests, if given a chance. No such dilemma confronts the Greens – who will be firmly behind the barricades. But, still, there is the lure of pragmatism. I expect the Greens to enter the next Holyrood elections with a litany of claimed achievements and a taste of what more could be feasible, if they are granted influence. Always a degree of grandiloquence on the climate. But a focus on cutting costs for working families. Rent controls, free bus travel for young people, secured by the Greens in partnership with the SNP. This leadership election will determine who is primarily making that case. Patrick Harvie is standing down as co-convener. Lorna Slater is seeking re-election. As I write, MSPs Ross Greer and Gillian Mackay are also in the frame. Others may emerge. En passant, I should note that the winners will not necessarily be one woman, one man, as in the past. That reflects revised equality guidance. But political balance will still be at the core of this contest. What direction will the Scottish Greens pursue? And could it lead them back to shared power at Holyrood? Brian Taylor is a former political editor for BBC Scotland and a columnist for The Herald. He cherishes his family, the theatre – and Dundee United FC
