May I inject a few facts into this thread?
Irvine (not Irving) harbour holds many vessels and the fact that they are there does not indicate ownership by the Scottish Maritime Museum Trust (SMMT). There are several, in various states of repair, that have no connection with the Museum whatsoever, e.g. "the interesting little wind turbine yacht" which is still owned by Glasgow University but receives no support or maintenance from them.
The Museum was reasonably funded in the days of Strathclyde Region and EU grants (now both gone), although never to the extent that it was able to open year-round. It has teetered on the brink of insolvency more than once and is run with the minimum of staff. For years funding has been doled out from the government on a three-month basis such that the staff have never been confident of a long-term future and the Lottery Fund would not contribute. The attitude of the latter has been 'you cannot demonstrate long-term funding and so we cannot give you any?' Catch 22! Thus it’s been very much a case of targeting what funds were available and inevitably some parts of the collection have suffered. This has not been for lack of any effort by the Museum, it is simple economics and the Museum Director, his staff and all the volunteers have become adept at getting a quart out of a pint pot. They should be recognised for this achievement and not slated.
Despite all this, recently the Museum became accredited by the Museums Council as the holder of the Scottish National Collection of maritime artefacts. This will mean that the long-term funding of the Museum should be assured and allow new applications to the Lottery Fund. The snag is that the present budget of the Museums Council is insufficient for all the demands of several museums upon it. Thus, watch this space as they say.
Re. the City of Adelaide, owned by the City of Adelaide Trust and not “the local council”, the SMMT has been trying to obtain funds for her restoration for 13 years and in this time every interest group under the sun has said she should be preserved but none of them has contributed a penny – certainly not the “several million” claimed as a fact in this thread. When a certain businessman came along last year who was prepared to fund the restoration in full, a structural survey showed that it was too late. She is far from “complete” and by the time all the rotten wood and rusted iron was replaced, the result would not be a restored City of Adelaide – it would just be a replica. Thus the decision to apply (successfully) for planning permission for ‘Recorded Deconstruction’ i.e. save what could be saved to demonstrate the reasons why CoA was important, film and record the rest and thus save something for posterity. It’s worth noting that neither Sunderland nor Adelaide have requested any part of the vessel and as for “local opinion” that says she can be floated off on a barge, the probability is that she would break up if any attempt was made to move her bodily. The world is full of ‘experts’ on the CoA; few of them are realists.
The ‘Antares’? Yes it was a tragedy that led her to arrive in Irvine but the cold fact is that she has no historical significance in ship design terms that would lead to money being spent on her and the Museum has to harden its heart and target its funds.
The Linthouse Building itself? Why was it moved to Irvine? Because the building had historical significance and if it had been left in Glasgow it would have been rubble years ago. Have you been to John Brown’s lately?
The restoration of the Puffer ‘Spartan’ is nearing the final phase, the 108 years’ old coaster ‘Kyles’ is on the slip. Next in line is Carola, (probably) the oldest seagoing screw-propelled steam yacht in the world. Now all those who claim to care about our maritime heritage will be pleased to here that your help with these projects in terms of time, material or cash will be very gratefully received. Which one of you will be first in line?