Former CCA members call for details of Condor Islander purchase to be made public

‘It is very difficult for anyone outside the CCA to speculate as to the reasons for its engagement and the apparent threat to the supply chain, but the situation does beg a whole host of questions that I hope will be answered in due course,’ said Gavin St Pier.

Among the questions that Deputy St Pier had were issues surrounding the previous role of the locally-managed Guernsey Investment Fund as co-investor along with Condor.

‘There is now no mention of the GIF. Did the board of the GIF conclude that this was not a deal they would be willing to do? If so, why?’

The GIF was unavailable for comment yesterday.

P&R said it had become aware of ‘challenges’ which meant that any deal was unlikely to be completed as originally planned.

Heidi Soulsby said she felt the involvement of the CCA indicated that things had gone wrong somewhere.

‘The CCA will have had to satisfy itself that there was a significant risk that an emergency would occur unless that action was performed, as set out in the law,’ she said.

Financial figures from Condor Ferries were circulated to States members yesterday by a third party.

The report made reference to several matters, including the refinancing of borrowing, and Deputy Soulsby, a qualified accountant, said that certain conclusions may be drawn from its accounts which could have influenced the ship deal.

Deputy St Pier also identified the terms of the States’ loan to the joint venture as a key issue.

‘What rate is the States lending at? We know it is fixed for 10 years but on what terms? How soft are they? Are they above or below the States’ own cost of borrowing at 3.375% through the States of Guernsey bond? Presumably the States will have recourse to the ship as security for the loan?’

He acknowledged that some elements of the deal – such as the exact cost of the ship – would be commercially sensitive, but encouraged the States to publish as much about the terms of the deal and the reasons for it as soon as it was able to.

Scrutiny Management Committee president Deputy Yvonne Burford said she was also hoping for more information on the deal to be released.

‘I’d like to know what the interest rate is on the loan from the bond. It’s public money that is being used so there needs to be a return on it,’ she said.

Surprise at lack of Jersey involvement in purchase

QUESTIONS have been asked among deputies about Jersey’s lack of involvement in the purchase of the new Condor Islander, even though the ship seems certain to serve both island communities on Condor’s northern and southern routes.

Deputy Heidi Soulsby said she could not understand why Jersey did not appear to be involved.

‘If this was a potential emergency situation for Guernsey, why is not for Jersey? It is unlikely to be a viable operation without Jersey, and the media release says it will be used for routes to and from that island,’ she said.

‘It seems strange that this would be done, and a joint venture set up, without conversations with the Jersey government.’

Jersey’s Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture minister Deputy Kirsten Morel did not answer direct questions about no Jersey involvement in the deal. In a statement issued in response to Guernsey Press questions, he said he remained committed to working with the States of Guernsey.

‘We have shared objectives to secure high-quality, resilient sea connectivity,’ he said.

‘Both islands depend upon – and benefit hugely from – our sea links and I am confident that we can meet our shared Channel Islands objectives in any new arrangement. This vessel acquisition does not change our outlook or approach.’

A spokesman for Condor said that it had been interested in purchasing another vessel for some time, and would have already done so had it not been for the challenges caused by Covid and limited availability of the size of vessel required.

‘The second conventional ferry will improve resilience and connectivity and is good news for the islands,’ he said.