Recent Clyde shipbuilding has so often been a story of broken promises and short-term thinking. The news that defence giant BAE Systems is to downgrade its multi-million-pound investments at its facilities in Govan and Scotstoun, making for much smaller contracts, is just the latest episode in a litany of disappointments.

Only last year Defence Secretary Michael Fallon was adamant that an order for Type 26 frigates would secure jobs on the Clyde for 20 years. At first it was 13 frigates, then eight. Welcome as these orders and accompanying job security are, the reduced orders were a far cry from what was mooted before the 2014 independence referendum.

That there was an element of pork-barrel politics in all of this in now evident, with grand promises never fully coming to fruition.The backtracking seems to continue. Not only has BAE Systems confirmed it has scrapped plans to build a major new Scotstoun frigate-outfitting hall, it has also dropped a fall-back scheme for a new, smaller facility in Govan.

Only last year, leading businessman Sir John Parker was given the task of examining how British naval shipbuilding could be kept sustainable and increase exports. Following a published review of his findings, he spoke of how it was incumbent on the Clyde yards to use their “firm workload” to push forward modernisation of technology and advance digital engineering and productivity.

He said they needed to be “match-fit” so they would be the yards of choice. Just how the Clyde yards are supposed to become “match-fit” with a downgrading of investment and facilities is anybody’s guess. Sir John also spoke of how “no-one should be afraid of competition”.

What, then, is to be made of the news that one such competitor, Irving of Nova Scotia, is building a warship dock hall similar to the ones abandoned on the Clyde? Not only is Irving advertising to lure skilled Clydeside shipbuilders to Canada, it will also be better placed to bid for future orders such as the new Type-31 frigate.

Clyde-built ships are constructed outside rather than under cover, the latter the way in which modern shipyards should operate. BAE Systems and its paymasters at the Ministry of Defence appear to have an improvised approach of “make do and mend,” that puts Clyde yards at a serious disadvantage when it comes to ensuring their long-term future and sustained competitiveness.

As trade union convener for the yards Duncan McPhee points out, far from being the “game changer” construction of the new Clyde facilities could have been, a missed opportunity lies in their place.

BAE Systems’ investment in the new facilities would have allowed the full potential of shipbuilding on the Clyde to be realised. Instead, it is faced with a future of “constrained capacity”. During the independence referendum, Downing Street insisted Scotland would continue to play a central part in delivering new warships.

That promise has only partially been fulfilled. Clyde’s skilled shipbuilders have been competing with one hand tied behind their backs. Proper investment and a competitive strategy that allows them to fight squarely for future orders are required.