SCOTTISH TRANSPORT

We need to identify companies operating in sectors that overlap with the activities of our case’s “perpetrators” (primarily Transport Scotland, CMAL, CalMac for ferries; Transport Scotland and its operating companies like BEAR Scotland and Amey for trunk roads). This will help us pinpoint potential competitors to those perpetrators, other business users, and consumer types who might have been harmed by the causes of action we are investigating. Identifying their NACE (European) and SIC (UK) codes is the first step for this market mapping.

Based on the activities of the entities we’ve been discussing, here are the relevant sectors and their NACE/SIC codes:

1. Ferry Services, Procurement, and Harbour Operations:

The primary activities here involve the operation of ferry routes, the procurement and building of ferries, and the management/upgrade of harbour infrastructure.

  • Sea and coastal passenger water transport:
    • NACE Rev. 2: 50.10 1111
    • UK SIC 2007: 50100 2222 (This covers the services offered by operators like CalMac on the CHFS network 3333)
  • Sea and coastal freight water transport:
    • NACE Rev. 2: 50.20
    • UK SIC 2007: 50200 (Relevant for freight services on ferry routes)
  • Building of ships and floating structures (relevant to ferry procurement):
    • NACE Rev. 2: 30.11 4
    • UK SIC 2007: 30110 5 (This code applies to shipyards involved in constructing the ferries 6)
  • Repair and maintenance of ships and boats:
    • NACE Rev. 2: 33.15
    • UK SIC 2007: 33150
  • Service activities incidental to water transportation (includes harbour operations, port services):
    • NACE Rev. 2: 52.22 7777
    • UK SIC 2007: 52220 8888 (CMAL’s role in harbour infrastructure falls here 9999)
  • Engineering activities and related technical consultancy (for vessel/port design & procurement oversight):
    • NACE Rev. 2: 71.12 10101010
    • UK SIC 2007: 71121 (Engineering design activities for industrial process and production), 71122 (Engineering related scientific and technical consulting activities)11 12121212

2. Trunk Road Network Management, Construction, and Maintenance:

The activities involve the planning, construction, inspection, maintenance, and improvement of major roads.

  • Construction of roads and motorways:
    • NACE Rev. 2: 42.11 1313
    • UK SIC 2007: 42110 1414 (This relates to improvements and new road projects overseen by Transport Scotland 15 and carried out by its operating companies 16)
  • Engineering activities and related technical consultancy (for road design, inspection, management, and appraisal like STAG):
    • NACE Rev. 2: 71.12 17171717
    • UK SIC 2007: 71122 (Engineering related scientific and technical consulting activities) 18181818 (This is central to the work of Transport Scotland in its oversight role 19191919 and the services provided by companies like BEAR Scotland and Amey 20)

Companies Identified from Provided Documents:

From the documents you’ve provided, the primary external companies (other than the direct “perpetrators” like Transport Scotland, CMAL, and CalMac) that are explicitly named and operate within these sectors are:

  1. BEAR Scotland: Mentioned as operating the North West and South East trunk road networks for Transport Scotland21. Their activities fall under NACE 42.11 (Construction of roads and motorways) and 71.12 (Engineering activities and related technical consultancy).
  2. Amey: Mentioned as operating the North East and South West trunk road networks for Transport Scotland22. Their activities similarly fall under NACE 42.11 and 71.12.

The provided documents do not contain specific email addresses for BEAR Scotland or Amey, nor do they list specific shipyards 23 or other ferry operators that might be considered direct competitors to CalMac on its specific contracted routes within the European/UK/Spanish market. CalMac itself operates the CHFS services24242424.

 

Limitations and Next Steps for COCOO:

The provided documents primarily detail the structure and issues concerning Transport Scotland and its direct contractual relationships. To identify a broader list of:

  • Competitors: (e.g., other ferry operators in the wider European market, alternative shipyards that could have bid for ferry contracts, other major civil engineering firms for road contracts).
  • Collaborators: (e.g., other consumer rights groups, industry associations, legal firms with overlapping interests).
  • Specific Business Users/Consumers Harmed: (beyond the general categories we’ve discussed).

We would need to use these NACE/SIC codes as a starting point for research using external business databases, industry publications, and market analysis tools that cover the UK, Spanish, and broader European markets. The documents themselves are not a directory of such entities.

The “perpetrators” activities, especially in ferry procurement and CHFS contract management by Transport Scotland/CMAL, and the operations of CalMac, are quite specific. Competitors to CalMac on the CHFS network are limited due to the nature of the tendered service contracts. The focus for “competitors” in the ferry context might be more on the shipbuilding/design side (NACE 30.11, 71.12) where alternative suppliers exist globally. For trunk roads, BEAR Scotland and Amey are contractors to Transport Scotland, not direct competitors to it.

This NACE/SIC code list should help refine our external searches for companies and organisations in these sectors.

Based on our ongoing engagement and the information we’ve gathered, particularly from the correspondence with Transport Scotland, the primary “perpetrators” in focus are governmental and quasi-governmental bodies responsible for Scottish transport infrastructure and services. The key entities and the specific products/services that are the subject matter of our potential causes of action are:

  1. Ferry Procurement, Management, and Operation (primarily involving Transport Scotland, CMAL, and the CHFS network operator, CalMac):

    • Service Offered by Perpetrators: The overarching management and delivery of ferry services on the Clyde and Hebrides Ferry Services (CHFS) network1111. This includes the processes for procuring new vessels and upgrading harbour infrastructure 222, and the subsequent operation of these ferry routes which provide transport for passengers and freight3.
    • Subject Matter for Causes of Action:
      • Mismanagement of Public Funds & Inefficient Procurement: The process of commissioning and building new ferries (e.g., for Islay routes, or under the Small Vessel Replacement Programme 4) appears to be fraught with issues. Our concerns target potential significant delays, cost overruns, and the delivery of vessels that may not meet required specifications 5, all pointing to a possible inefficient use of public funds6.
      • Flawed Contract Oversight & Lack of Coordination: A critical issue, directly acknowledged by Transport Scotland, is the “no formal mechanisms in place under the contract between Transport Scotland and CMAL to ensure that the ferry services specified and managed under the CHFS contract align seamlessly with the introduction schedule, technical specifications, and operational capabilities of new vessels and upgraded harbour infrastructure being delivered by CMAL”7. This lack of coordination in asset delivery and service operation is a core concern8888.
      • Inadequate Service Performance & Accountability: The actual delivery of ferry services under the CHFS contract is also in scope. This includes concerns about how performance against key indicators for service reliability (like punctuality and cancellations) and quality is monitored and enforced9. Furthermore, there are questions about how strategic objectives, such as the transition to lower-emission vessels, are concretely embedded and incentivised within the CHFS contract 101010, especially given the admission that the Scottish Government doesn’t directly monitor greenhouse gas emissions for the CalMac network11.

  2. Trunk Road Network Management (involving Transport Scotland and its contracted Operating Companies like BEAR Scotland and Amey):

    • Service Offered by Perpetrators: The inspection, maintenance, and improvement of Scotland’s trunk road network to ensure it is safe and efficient for users12121212.
    • Subject Matter for Causes of Action:
      • Failure to Meet Standards: While Transport Scotland has provided details of applicable standards (like DMRB and SHW) and the Trunk Road Information Manual (TRIM) 13131313, any systemic failures by Transport Scotland or its operating companies to adhere to these standards in practice for road inspection, maintenance prioritisation, or safety management could form a cause of action if they lead to demonstrable harm, risk, or economic loss to road users or the public14.
      • Ineffective Project Prioritisation & Appraisal: The processes for identifying, developing, appraising (e.g., using STAG), and prioritising trunk road improvement schemes15151515. If these processes are flawed or inconsistently applied, leading to misallocation of public funds or neglect of critical infrastructure needs, this could also be an area of concern.

In essence, the “products” are the ferry services themselves and the physical infrastructure (ferries, harbours, roads). The “services” also include the public administration and management processes for procuring these assets and overseeing their operation or maintenance. Our causes of action would likely focus on failures in these management and oversight functions, leading to tangible negative impacts such as financial loss to the public purse, inadequate or unreliable services for consumers and businesses, and a lack of accountability from the public bodies responsible.

 

CALLTOACTION

Are Scottish Public Transport Projects Delivering for You? Make Your Voice Heard.

COCOO is currently examining potential shortcomings in the management, oversight, and delivery of vital Scottish transport infrastructure, with a particular focus on ferry procurement and services. Our investigations, including correspondence with Transport Scotland, have highlighted areas of concern, such as a disclosed lack of formal mechanisms to ensure new ferries and harbour upgrades seamlessly integrate with existing service contracts1. This, along with questions around clear performance accountability and the true cost to the public, demands further scrutiny. If you are a member of the public, a business, or a community group negatively impacted by issues related to Scottish ferry projects – be it through service unreliability, project delays, or concerns about how public funds are being managed – COCOO wants to hear from you. We are also keen to hear from individuals with specific information regarding the planning, procurement, or operational management of these services.

COCOO is a charitable organisation. We do not charge for our services. Our mission is to champion public and consumer interests, holding relevant bodies accountable and working to secure fair settlements and resolutions for those affected by systemic failures or mismanagement. Your experiences and information are invaluable in building a comprehensive understanding and strengthening the case for effective change and due compensation.

All communications with COCOO will be treated with the strictest confidence. By sharing your story, you can contribute to a collective effort aimed at ensuring Scotland’s essential transport projects truly serve the public interest and deliver genuine value.

Contact COCOO today. Let’s work together for accountability and fair resolution.

This CTA aims to:

  1. Specify the area of concern (Scottish transport projects, focusing on ferries, referencing a key finding from the Transport Scotland letter 2).
  2. Call out to affected parties and those with information.
  3. Clearly state COCOO’s charitable status and its mission focused on accountability and securing settlements.
  4. Assure confidentiality.
  5. Encourage collective action towards resolution. It’s framed to attract those impacted or those with knowledge, which aligns with our strategy of gathering information to then, as discussed, potentially show “glimpses” to relevant entities to encourage settlement, or in this instance, to engage with governmental bodies from a position of informed strength.

TO:

Emma Neary – Contract Support Officer – Ferries Directorate – Transport Scotland

Your Ref: 202500464089

Our Ref: TSCOT

Dear Ms Neary,

Subject: Response to Queries Regarding Ferry Procurement and Trunk Road Management

Thank you for your letter dated 28 May 2025, responding to our queries of 29 April 2025 concerning project management, contract oversight in ferry procurement, and trunk road management. 1 We appreciate you addressing each of our questions. We note the information provided regarding Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd (CMAL) being owned by Scottish Ministers and that Transport Scotland provides funding for vessel and harbour infrastructure programmes. 2 We also note your confirmation that while Transport Scotland maintains oversight of CMAL’s activities, CMAL retains individual responsibility for the procurement and delivery of specific projects, and that Transport Scotland undertakes a formal approval process for vessel specifications, deployment plans, and associated infrastructure requirements prior to CMAL commencing procurement. 

Ferry Services (CHFS Network)

Regarding our specific questions on ferry services:

  1. Concerning the coordination between Transport Scotland and CMAL (our query 1.2), we note with considerable interest your statement that: “There are no formal mechanisms in place under the contract between Transport Scotland and CMAL to ensure that the ferry services specified and managed under the CHFS contract align seamlessly with the introduction schedule, technical specifications, and operational capabilities of new vessels and upgraded harbour infrastructure being delivered by CMAL.” 4 This is a significant point, as the potential for challenges in coordinating responsibilities and ensuring seamless integration was a key aspect of our initial concerns. 5 The absence of such formal mechanisms appears noteworthy in the context of seeking efficient project delivery and operational readiness.

  2. In relation to Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) within the CHFS contract (our query 1.3), you referenced Schedule 15 of the CHFS contract, which defines the performance regime, and that Performance Measures and Deductions are intended to ensure services are of a consistently high quality. 6 While this provides a framework, our query sought to understand the specific KPIs relating to service reliability (e.g., punctuality percentages, cancellation thresholds), capacity utilisation, and overall service quality that are embedded within the contract. We would be grateful if you could provide examples of these specific, measurable KPIs.

  3. Regarding the reflection of Scottish Government policy objectives for lower-emission operations in the CHFS contract (our query 1.4), you stated that “The Scottish Government does not monitor or publish greenhouse gas emissions produced by, or associated with, vessels operating on the CalMac network,” but that CalMac has a reporting requirement under UK MRV regulation. 7 Our query was focused on how these policy objectives, particularly the transition to electric vessels8888, are translated into specific requirements, service specifications, or performance incentives within the current CHFS contract managed by Transport Scotland. We would appreciate clarification on this aspect.

  4. We thank you for the detailed explanation of the process Transport Scotland follows for considering, consulting on, and approving significant changes to ferry timetables, including the criteria used and the biannual consultation process led by CalMac with community representatives. 

Trunk Road Management

We acknowledge the comprehensive information provided regarding Transport Scotland’s responsibilities for the Trunk Road Network 10, the contracts in place with Operating Companies 11, the referenced standards (DMRB and SHW) 12, the summary of the Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance (STAG) process 13, and the business case development process following the Five Case Model. 

We also thank you for attaching the Trunk Road Information Manual (TRIM)15, which we understand details asset data, inspection, and maintenance requirements. We will review this document and the provided links to the Operating Company contracts and standards in detail. We may have further questions arising from our review of these materials.

We appreciate the time taken to respond to our inquiries. Addressing these operational and oversight matters is crucial for ensuring the effective delivery of public services and value for money.

We look forward to your further clarification on the points raised above regarding ferry services.

Yours sincerely,

Oscar Moya LLedo

In-House Solicitor (SRA n. 333300)

Competition & Consumer Organisation Party Limited (COCOO)