The Scottish Government said today that it intends to directly award contracts for four new vessels to Ferguson Marine in a move designed to secure the long-term future of the state-owned shipyard.

In a statement to Parliament, Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes said that Ferguson Marine remains “the last commercial shipyard on the Clyde” and plays an important role in skilled employment in Inverclyde and in Scotland’s wider industrial capability.

The statement reiterated that the yard was taken into public ownership in 2019 to safeguard jobs and complete MV Glen Sannox and MV Glen Rosa, and said its priority is now “to secure a sustainable future for the yard, with clear work, improved delivery confidence, and a modernised facility.”

Providing an update on the two dual-fuel ferries, the Government said MV Glen Sannox has completed her first year in service and that MV Glen Rosa continues to progress, with delivery anticipated in the fourth quarter of 2026. The statement acknowledged delays and cost pressures associated with the vessels, stating: “I recognise the frustration felt by Parliament, by island communities and by the workforce due to the delays and cost pressures associated with the Glen Sannox and Glen Rosa.” It added that scrutiny of the yard’s performance and past decisions was “necessary and appropriate.”

Looking ahead, the Government said it proposes to directly award two ferries under Phase Two of the Small Vessel Replacement Programme to Ferguson Marine. In addition, ministers propose to award contracts for replacements for the marine research vessel Scotia and the marine protection vessel Minna. “Together this represents a programme of four new vessels proposed to be built at the yard. This is a substantial and clear demonstration of our confidence in Ferguson Marine.”

The Scottish Government statement said any awards would be subject to legal requirements and value-for-money considerations, with a detailed due diligence process underway. Engagement with the Competition and Markets Authority would also be required before formal contract decisions could be made.

Forbes argued that the proposed vessels are a strong fit for the yard’s facilities and workforce capability, and said strengthened governance and assurance arrangements are now in place. The Government pointed to the publication of the 2024/25 annual accounts and Audit Scotland’s report, which it said demonstrate “measurable improvement in governance and controls compared with previous years.”

The proposed four-vessel programme would form the core of the yard’s workload over the next five years, according to the statement, providing continuity for the workforce and supply chain while allowing capacity for additional commercial work. The Government reiterated that it intends to return the business to the private sector “when the time is right.”

The statement also referenced a previously announced commitment of up to £14.2 million over two years to support modernisation at Ferguson Marine, subject to due diligence. Interim investment has focused on essential repairs, health and safety improvements and targeted equipment upgrades, with further modernisation expected to align with the proposed vessel delivery programme.

Concluding, the statement said “With our proposal to award a four-vessel programme to the yard, we are setting a clear ambition for Ferguson Marine’s future – one built on shipbuilding confidence, capability and continuity. We rescued Ferguson Marine for a purpose and we are determined to see it succeed.”

George Allison
George Allison is the founder and editor of the UK Defence Journal. He holds a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and specialises in naval and cyber security topics. George has appeared on national radio and television to provide commentary on defence and security issues. Twitter: @geoallison

11 COMMENTS

      • Well there’s a start at least ! 😁

        I was looking at that other UK Defence Forum place last week, It came up on my search bar whilst “Roaming” (different Internet in the Motorhome). Looks like a Bike Forum I was on,(same format) but heavily Moderated. I’m no fan of Mods or Admin on those sorts of sites as It’s nothing more than one persons opinion being cancelled by another persons opinion. Trouble with that is It just smacks of Censorship.

        Best guess here Is that comments were made that ripped “Admin” for posting another Scottish political biased article that has nothing to do with Defence and everything to do with personal political bias.

        The test of Censorship can only be guaged by the comments that remain visible, Reasons for any that are removed really do need to be explained, otherwise the whole point of comments sections is pointless.

        But I’m sure you are right.

        • UKDF isn’t that heavily moderated, usually stuff only gets deleted because somebody got drunk and started posting random insults or a discussion gets too heated.
          I can begrudge George a few personal articles, he does live a few miles down the road from the yard. Just so long as the other articles are still of a good standard, which is being achieved at the moment.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here