Members of the Bute Ferry Users Group (BFUG) complained at their AGM this week that Caledonian MacBrayne's proposal was being sold to the island as a improvement to the service, when it was nothing of the sort - with one member of the group suggesting an hourly frequency would be "an economic disaster" for the island, and another accusing the company of "Orwell speak" on the subject.

The group is also unhappy at what they say is CalMac's desire to limit talks on service improvements to the subject of an hourly timetable, without considering other possible enhancements.

A working party, with membership from BFUG, CalMac, Bute Community Council and Bute Beyond 2000 is due to meet for the first time on Wednesday - but outgoing BFUG chair Reeni Kennedy told the group's AGM, at the Pavilion on Friday night, that CalMac had asked for all items on Wednesday's agenda to be removed, apart from the question of an hourly frequency.

There was also much suspicion among those at the meeting about CalMac's possible motivation for suggesting the hourly timetable - and universal opposition to the plan in principle.

Said Mrs Kennedy: "This is being sold to us as an improvement to the service, but the community didn't have aspirations for timetable amendments.

"What CalMac have presented so far represents a further degradation of the service. Their proposed new timetable gives a result of two fewer sailings per day - that may not sound like much, but it makes for 521 fewer sailings a year."

Lachie McMillan pointed out that with an hourly timetable, passengers who missed a train at Wemyss Bay would still have an hour to wait for the next one, and said the move would be "an economic disaster" for the whole of Bute.

John Duncan, who chaired BFUG when the organisation was set up in 200x, was equally blunt in his opposition, stating: "This is plain Orwell-speak to me. We need to reject any notion that this is an improvement in any sense - I see no benefit to it at all."

Secretary George Docherty suggested the proposed change had been mooted by CalMac because MVs Bute and Argyle were neither suitable for the route nor able to cope with the current timetable, with its 35-minute crossings and ten-minute turnaround time at both ports.

CalMac's apparent desire to restrict the new working group's agenda to the issue of an hourly timetable was also roundly condemned, with Mrs Kennedy stating it was equally important to discuss wider issues such as access and egress, parking for commuters and the difficulties of berthing at Wemyss Bay in certain weather conditions.

Some present were worried that even to talk about the question of an hourly timetable could be interpreted as tacit acceptance of the proposal - though others viewed it as an opportunity to at least try to secure some improvements at the same time.

Said Mick Common: "CalMac probably want this change, and they're probably going to get it - the question is, what can be screwed out of them in return?"

We put BFUG's concerns to Brian Fulton, CalMac's regional manager for Bute, who said: "This was a short life working group formed to discuss the specific issue of the timetable, and to include all sorts of other things at this stage would just dilute the whole point of the meeting.

"We are always open to discussion and conversation. We are always there to discuss the whole range of issues, but that was not the point of this particular forum.

"If, at any further meeting, we decide we need a specific forum for any other item, we will be happy to organise that."

BFUG's opposition to the hourly service has been backed by Alan Scoles, operations planning director for WA Shearings, owners of the Glenburn Hotel, who told a Scottish Parliament inquiry into the state of the country's ferry services that the timetable should not be driven by rail connections when so much of the traffic was vehicle-borne.

"If this was to happen," Mr Scoles told the inquiry, "there would be a reduction to the ferry timetable, which would lead to a reduction in ferry capacity.

"This would need detailed analysis for the peak periods based on our operating experience when we already sometimes cannot have our desired sailings.

"We also fail to see why a rail frequency could dictate that for a ferry when much of the business is vehicle and not foot passenger generated."