ANGRY Scots steelworkers are demanding to know why the Scottish Government awarded the contract for the new Forth Bridge to a consortium that sourced the material from China, Poland and Spain.
Transport Scotland said a week ago the winning consortium had sub-contracted the steel supplies abroad, claiming there had been no Scottish bids.
But the Indian conglomerate Tata, which owns the Dalzell works in Motherwell and Clydebridge, said last night it would have been in line for a contract if the work had gone to another consortium.
A spokesman said: "Tata Steel can confirm that it did participate indirectly in the tender process for the Forth Bridge contract and that its Dalzell works is capable of supplying a significant proportion of the steel required."
Alex Salmond was questioned about the contract by Motherwell and Wishaw MSP John Pentland amid growing anger that Dalzell missed out on the business.
Michael Leahy, general secretary of the steel union Community, said: "The First Minister had the chance to tell the people of Scotland why no Scottish steel worker will benefit from the project. I call again on the First Minister to halt the decision while a review of the whole procurement process takes place."
Labour's Shadow Secretary for Infrastructure and Capital Investment, Richard Baker, said: "Last week SNP's transport agency stated that the multi-million pound steel contract had gone to foreign-based companies because no Scottish firm bid for the work. It now transpires Scottish firms could well have benefited if the SNP Government looked more carefully at getting the biggest bang for our buck, rather than the lowest possible cost."
A Transport Scotland spokeswoman said: "No Scottish structural steelwork fabricators bid for the work."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article