The Outer Hebrides Commerce Group has welcomed the commitment from Scottish Transport Minister, Keith Brown MSP, to work with them and help inform future Ministerial decisions regarding ferry fare pricing policy. After months of publicly bruising exchanges, the Minister requested a meeting with the Group – and they parted, having agreed to sign up to a study that will accurately reflect the benefit of reduced ferry fares.
OHCG chairman Calum Campbell, of Polybox Ltd said: “Clearly, there is at last, an appreciation by the SNP Government that massive ferry fare increases depress an already struggling economy. We have had to endure one 50% increase, but today we pledged to work with Government to prevent a further 50% increase next April. We are pleased that Mr Brown signed up to a proper examination of the benefits of reduced ferry fares. The six month study will determine exactly how island businesses and families benefited from cheaper ferry travel. Sadly, the last study commissioned by the SNP Government was error ridden, and misinformed the Government. We already have the support of Comhairle nan Eilean Siar to assemble the information required, and we will demonstrate that another 50% increase will be disastrous for our island families and businesses”.
David Wood from Woody’s Express also attended the meeting at the Comhairle offices today. He said: “Mr Brown’s request to meet with us was welcome and conciliatory. Prior to this year’s 50% increase in fares, our views were being dismissed and rubbished. But today, Keith Brown came to the islands, and appeared to genuinely listen to our group, comprising business representatives from Barra to the Butt. We’d hope that in January next year that the Minister will be able to conclude that he must halt the 50% increase due to be implemented next April. We also welcome his commitment to simplify the complicated and discriminatory ferry fares structures that currently exists for commercial traffic. We were very pleased to hear that he wants all hauliers to benefit from a new and easily understood pricing regime. We will work with the SNP Government and Comhairle nan Eilean Siar to inform a properly conducted study”.
In attendance were:
Calum Campbell, Chairperson OHCG, Polybox Ltd
Gail Robertson, Co-ordinator OHCG, DJ Buchanan Haulage
David Wood, Woody’s Express
Duncan MacInnes, WIFA
Alasdair Morrison, Harris Tweed Hebrides
Hector MacDonald, Hebrides Haulage
Shonnie MacRitchie, County Hotel
Shonnie MacLennan, John MacLennan Contractors Ltd
Angus Campbell, Leader Comhairle nan Eilean Siar
Norman MacDonald, Convenor, Comhairle nan Eilean Siar
Can’t understand why the transport group are making such a fuss over all this, it is largely self-inflicted! If the hauliers had passed on the advantages to their customers in the first place, the SNP would have been unlikely to withdraw it. It is purely because of the greed of certain hauliers in hanging on to the benefits for themselves that everyone will suffer – the consumer most of all.
Tina! You must be new to this debate? It has been established and proved that the hauliers and business community of the islands passed on the savings from RET and more! It has been comical to watch while the ‘study’ paid for by the SNP has been picked apart and examined to be statistically a joke. The bottom line would appear to be that the SNP Government thought that they could make a £2.5M saving by falsely accusing the Western Isles business community and employers of being dishonest and greedy, that the SNP Government hoped that this would distract the community from the fact that at the previous 2 elections they proclaimed how successful RET had been and that the only way to protect RET was to vote for them. Most of the people in the islands are neither stupid nor forgetful. The SNP Government paid someone to come up with an unscientific and unstatistical story to try and justify the dismantling of RET in the hope that no-one would notice that they themselves had misled the electorate. In plain language Tina, the SNP paid for more lies, to try and hide their lies they had already made. It is to the people of the Western Isles credit that the community wide and cross party campaign, spear-headed by the OHCG, to ensure that the SNP were made aware that lies and lies to justify lies, are not acceptable (whether paid for by the tax payer or not) and that loading the Western Isles community with this extra financial burden was going to be to the financial and cultural detriment of every home and business on the islands.
It is to the SNP’s credit that they have at last decided to close their lying mouths (on this matter) take their fingers out their ears, dig their heads out the sand (and take their arses out the air) and agree to the proper and necessary assessment of the benefits of RET and the way forward on this matter for these islands.
Well done OHCG, Comhairle and everyone of these islands that kept this clean, honest and straightforward campaign on track.
The ret money savings by hauliers has been put back into our community,I never saw a penny reduction in haulage prices .Where did you get that one from Mr Macphail
I am entering the RET debate for the first time. Having said that, I have been monitoring the situation closely. I have spoken with numerous people about RET including hauliers. Mr Macphail’s statement is very politically emotional without facts. This statistical study he refers to has never been published or made readily available to the public. That being the case it brings into question its crediblity if it does exist. I have not met one haulier who initially passed on the saving, the majority used it to absorb future costs. If the the hauliers had entered the spirit of the exercise at the outset where the public seen the benefits on day one (not after 18 months) we would still have the scheme. When the Lib/Dems introduced the Nothern isles scheme they had stiff opposition from Jack McConnel. He and his Labour colleagues were very much against any ferry subsidy. If you look back at those eight yearsof power at Holyrood you’ll find that most of the policies which were of benefit to the people of Scotland came from the Lib/Dem side of the coalition. As for Mr Macphail to try and take the moral high ground is rediculous.
I think that Mr Macphail is misleading the public when he talks about some mysterious statistical report that supports the hauliers. I have followed the removal of RET for hauliers and I have yet to find this report. Maybe he can tell us where it can be found and the information that backs up its integrity.
RET has not been removed for hauliers, it has been removed for all commercial vehicle users, most of which are small private sector businesses who are struggling to survive with very slight margins as it is. This is not and has never been a haulier dispute! Maybe you cannot find the report which supports hauliers but have you read the report that has been used to support the decision to remove RET for commercial vehicles? If you have I would expect you to have a slightly different view, the report is fundamentally flawed and I cannot understand how anyone cannot see that. It suggests there are over 100 hauliers in the Western Isles for starters – where are they? I struggle to get into double figures.
Thank you for the correction. I have no doubt that the smaller hauliers passed on the savings to the public. What constitutes a haulier ? it’s down to interpetation. I know of small business who use their own transport to collect goods for themselves and others. Does that make them a haulier ?
Is Polybox a haulier ? Is Harris Tweed Hebrides a haulier ? is the fisherman’s association a haulier ? is Islander Shelfish a haulier.? How many regular hauliers from the mainland were included in the survey ?
I take your point and accept that the smaller businesses suffered for the sins of the larger ones. There is one point which is clear is that a number of the larger hauliers were very slow at passing on any savings.
As for the stastistical report Mr Macphail refers to, it would be interesting to read it if it does exist and is objective. Somehow I think he is just trying to gain a political edge.
There is no one more disappointed at the withdrawl of commercial RET than I am. I also feel that the large hauliers should not be benefiting from the subsidy at the expense of the public.
Maybe this topic has run its course for now, it would nice to talk about how our council can’t operate a tendering process, or the wind turbines on the Pentland Road or the new interconector or the UBC scandal
Is it correct that some of the bigger hauliers are now back negotiating volume discounts under the new scheme, tilting the playing field further away from the small companies, yet again.
You can’t blame them too much, but why are CalMac being allowed to do this?? It might explain why one haulier in particular wasn’t too opposed to the changes.
There is a story doing the rounds about a Labour Party person who possibly owes UB substantionaly. If its true it should be exposed as 100 people became redundant. If they belonged to another party it would be well known. Just hope its not true