Documents from 2022 that consider the capital upgrades required to make Ferguson Marine competitive: FOI release

Information requested

The content of all documents produced this year that consider the nature and cost of the capital upgrades required to bring the Ferguson Marine yard to a position of competitiveness. Please include any emails or reports held by the Scottish Government.

Response

The information held by the Scottish Government that falls within the scope of your request has been attached separately for your reference. While our aim is to provide you information wherever we can, on this occasion we are unable to provide you with all of the information you have requested as statutory exemptions under FOISA apply. Details on what exemptions apply and why can be found below.

Section 30(b)(i) – Free and frank provision of advice
An exemption under section 30(b)(i) of FOISA (free and frank provision of advice) applies to some of the information requested. This exemption applies because disclosure would, or would be likely to, inhibit substantially the free and frank provision of advice. This exemption recognises the need for officials to have a private space within which to provide free and frank advice to other officials before the Scottish Government reaches a settled public view. Disclosing the content of free and frank advice on Ferguson Marine (Port Glasgow)’s possible future plans will substantially inhibit the provision of such advice in the future, particularly because these discussions are still ongoing and decisions have not been taken. This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open, transparent, and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, there is a greater public interest in allowing a private space within which officials can provide full and frank advice to Ministers and other officials, as part of the process of considering potential options to increase the competitiveness of the business. This private thinking space is essential to enable all options to be properly considered, based on the best available advice, so that robust strategic decisions can be taken. Premature disclosure is likely to undermine the full and frank discussion of issues between Ministers and officials, which in turn will undermine the quality of the decision making process, which would not be in the public interest.

Section 30(b)(ii) – Free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation
An exemption under section 30(b)(ii) of FOISA (free and frank exchange of views) applies to some of the information requested. This exemption applies because disclosure would, or would be likely to, inhibit substantially the free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation. This exemption recognises the need for officials to have a private space within which to discuss issues and options with external stakeholders before the Scottish Government reaches a settled public view. Disclosing the content of these discussions between SG officials and Ferguson Marine staff on the yard’s future direction will substantially inhibit such discussions in the future, because these stakeholders will be reluctant to provide their views fully and frankly if they believe that those views are likely to be made public, particularly while these discussions are still ongoing and decisions have not been taken. This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, there is a greater public interest in allowing Ministers and officials a private space within which to communicate with appropriate external stakeholders as part of the process of considering potential options to increase the competitiveness of the business. This private space is essential to enable all options to be properly considered, so that good policy decisions can be taken based on fully informed advice and evidence. Premature disclosure is likely to undermine the full and frank discussion of issues between the Scottish Government and these stakeholders, which in turn will undermine the quality of the policy making process, which would not be in the public interest.

Section 30(c) – substantial prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs
An exemption under section 30(c) of FOISA (prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs) applies to some of the information requested. It is essential for Ministers and officials to be able to meet and communicate, often in confidence, with external stakeholders on a range of issues. Disclosing the content of these communications and information about these meetings, particularly without the consent of the stakeholder, is likely to undermine their trust in the Scottish Government and will substantially inhibit communications on this type of issue in the future. These stakeholders will be reluctant to participate in meetings and provide their views fully and frankly if they believe that their views are likely to be made public, particularly while these discussions are still ongoing and decisions have not been taken, and/or these discussions relate to a sensitive or controversial issue. This would significantly harm the Government’s ability to carry out many aspects of its work, and could adversely affect its ability to gather all of the evidence it needs to make fully informed policies and decisions. This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, there is a greater public interest in allowing Ministers and officials a private space within which to communicate and meet with appropriate external stakeholders as part of the process of considering potential options to increase the competitiveness of the business. This private space is essential to enable all options to be properly considered, so that good policy decisions can be taken based on fully informed advice and evidence. Premature disclosure is likely to undermine the full and frank discussion of issues between the Scottish Government and these stakeholders, which in turn will undermine the quality of the policy/decision making process, which would not be in the public interest.

Section 33(1)(b) – Substantial prejudice to commercial interests
An exemption under section 33(1) (b) of FOISA applies to some of the information you have requested because it is likely to prejudice substantially the commercial interests of the parties. This exemption applies because release of the information would – or would be likely to – prejudice substantially the commercial interests of the commercial entities involved. Release of this information is likely to weaken the commercial position of Ferguson Marine while providing commercially sensitive information to competitors. It is also likely to have an impact on the long term profitability and attractiveness of the business to future investors. The information is not in the public interest given it could have a bearing on and potentially prejudice the commercial  interests of the parties involved in terms of placing them at a competitive disadvantage. As the exemption is conditional, we have applied the 'public interest test'. This means we have, in all the circumstances of this case, considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the exemptions. We have found that, on balance, at this time the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemptions. While we recognise that there is a general public interest in how public money is spent, there is a greater public interest in protecting sensitive commercial information from being released to competitors of Ferguson Marine (Port Glasgow), thus weakening its commercial position vis-à-vis the market.

Section 33(1)(a) – Trade Secret
Specifically, this exemption applies in as much as First Marine International’s methodology is considered a “trade secret”, and thus revealing the methods that they have used in formulating the report asked for in this contract would jeopardise their commercial operations (Section 33(1 (a)).

Section 33(2)(b) – Substantial prejudice to the financial interests of an administration in the UK
An exemption under section 33(2)(b) of FOISA (financial interests) applies to some of the information requested. This exemption applies because disclosure of this particular information would, or would be likely to, prejudice substantially the financial interests of the Scottish Government. Disclosing information about First Marine International (FMI)’s methods could cause significant harm to SG’s financial interests. This would be because it would decrease the willingness of FMI to engage in future contractual arrangements with SG. As FMI is one of a very small number of companies that are specialist in shipyard evaluation, this would significantly reduce the quality of advice available to SG. This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open and transparent government, and to help account for the expenditure of public money. However, there is a greater public interest in protecting SG’s access to specialist advice, in order for it to be able to administer its shipyard assets most effectively.

Section 38(1)(b) – Personal Data
This exemption applies to some of the information requested because it is personal data of a third party, i.e. names and contact details, and disclosing it would contravene the data protection principles in Article 5(1) of the General Data Protection Regulation and in section 34(1) of the Data Protection Act 2018. This exemption is not subject to the ‘public interest test’, so we are not required to consider if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption.

About FOI

The Scottish Government is committed to publishing all information released in response to Freedom of Information requests. View all FOI responses at http://www.gov.scot/foi-responses.

202200330019 - Supporting Documents

File type

71 page PDF

File size

9.2 MB