Chamber
Plenary, 01 Mar 2007
01 Mar 2007 · S2 · Plenary
Item of business
Aquaculture and Fisheries (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3
Amendment 14 is the same as a probing amendment that Rob Gibson lodged at stage 2. I said then that the Executive's intention was to strike a balance in the bill between regulation and not undermining investor confidence in the industry. The bill is appropriate regulation and retains the commercial freedom that our aquaculture industry requires to remain competitive. That approach has been welcomed by the Environment and Rural Development Committee and it would be disrupted if the Parliament were to accept amendment 14.
Rob Gibson mentioned the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006. The five-year time limit on undertaking development has been reduced to three years under that act, so there has been a reduction in the timescales. At stage 2, I gave the committee a number of examples of the legitimate commercial reasons that might prevent the development of particular fish farm sites at any given time. I also explained at stage 2—and subsequently in correspondence to Alasdair Morrison, which I copied to the convener of the Environment and Rural Development Committee—that any companies that believe themselves to be subject to unfair competition may take that up with the Office of Fair Trading.
Given the probing nature of Rob Gibson's stage 2 amendment and the fact that he withdrew it, I was not required to consider its legal effect in detail. However, the proposal is now before the Parliament in amendment 14, and I must consider its effect. Amendment 14 seeks to include a time limit within the code of conduct that the Scottish ministers may approve under section 7. Section 8 requires the Scottish ministers to monitor compliance with any such code and gives them the power to issue notices that require the taking of such steps as they consider necessary to secure compliance with the code. Contravention of such a notice without reasonable excuse would be an offence.
The legal effect of amendment 14 would not be to force companies to free up undeveloped sites, nor even to encourage them to do so, but to give an unreasonable degree of power to the Scottish ministers. I doubt that Rob Gibson really intends that the Scottish ministers should be able to force the occupiers of fish farm sites to operate a business on those sites on pain of criminal sanction, but that would be the effect of his amendment 14 were it to become law.
I fully understand the concern that lies behind amendment 14, which is that companies may be stifling competition by hanging on to potential fish farm sites and thereby limiting the opportunities for other companies and the potential growth of the aquaculture industry. As I said at stage 2, the issue is important, and the Executive takes an active interest in the work that Fisheries Research Services, the Crown Estate, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and the Scottish Salmon Producers Organisation are doing on site use and availability and the efficiency of site sharing among key players. Rob Gibson's amendment 14 would not be effective in preventing abuse that involved anti-competitive practices or agreements or abuse of a dominant position. That would be a matter for the competition authorities.
I urge Rob Gibson to withdraw amendment 14 for the reasons that I have outlined.
Rob Gibson mentioned the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006. The five-year time limit on undertaking development has been reduced to three years under that act, so there has been a reduction in the timescales. At stage 2, I gave the committee a number of examples of the legitimate commercial reasons that might prevent the development of particular fish farm sites at any given time. I also explained at stage 2—and subsequently in correspondence to Alasdair Morrison, which I copied to the convener of the Environment and Rural Development Committee—that any companies that believe themselves to be subject to unfair competition may take that up with the Office of Fair Trading.
Given the probing nature of Rob Gibson's stage 2 amendment and the fact that he withdrew it, I was not required to consider its legal effect in detail. However, the proposal is now before the Parliament in amendment 14, and I must consider its effect. Amendment 14 seeks to include a time limit within the code of conduct that the Scottish ministers may approve under section 7. Section 8 requires the Scottish ministers to monitor compliance with any such code and gives them the power to issue notices that require the taking of such steps as they consider necessary to secure compliance with the code. Contravention of such a notice without reasonable excuse would be an offence.
The legal effect of amendment 14 would not be to force companies to free up undeveloped sites, nor even to encourage them to do so, but to give an unreasonable degree of power to the Scottish ministers. I doubt that Rob Gibson really intends that the Scottish ministers should be able to force the occupiers of fish farm sites to operate a business on those sites on pain of criminal sanction, but that would be the effect of his amendment 14 were it to become law.
I fully understand the concern that lies behind amendment 14, which is that companies may be stifling competition by hanging on to potential fish farm sites and thereby limiting the opportunities for other companies and the potential growth of the aquaculture industry. As I said at stage 2, the issue is important, and the Executive takes an active interest in the work that Fisheries Research Services, the Crown Estate, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and the Scottish Salmon Producers Organisation are doing on site use and availability and the efficiency of site sharing among key players. Rob Gibson's amendment 14 would not be effective in preventing abuse that involved anti-competitive practices or agreements or abuse of a dominant position. That would be a matter for the competition authorities.
I urge Rob Gibson to withdraw amendment 14 for the reasons that I have outlined.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Murray Tosh):
Con
The next item of business is stage 3 proceedings on the Aquaculture and Fisheries (Scotland) Bill. Members will be aware that they require the bill as amende...
Section 7—Code of practice
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
The first group of amendments is on the code of practice: unused fish farm sites. Amendment 14, in the name of Rob Gibson, is the only amendment in the group.
Rob Gibson (Highlands and Islands) (SNP):
SNP
During stage 2, I raised the question of the way in which the approved code of conduct would act in terms of fish farms. That is a core element of part 1 of ...
The Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development (Sarah Boyack):
Lab
Amendment 14 is the same as a probing amendment that Rob Gibson lodged at stage 2. I said then that the Executive's intention was to strike a balance in the ...
Rob Gibson:
SNP
As the Environment and Rural Development Committee's stage 1 report suggested,"the long-term retention of sites which are left inactive is unacceptable."I ha...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
The question is, that amendment 14 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members:
No.
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
There will be a division. I suspend the meeting for five minutes.
Meeting suspended.
On resuming—
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
We will proceed with the division.
ForAdam, Brian (Aberdeen North) (SNP) Baird, Shiona (North East Scotland) (Green) Ballance, Chris (South of Scotland) (Green) Ballard, Mark (Lothians) (Green...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
The result of the division is: For 32, Against 70, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 14 disagreed to.
After section 17
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
Group 2 is on the prevention of entry into Scotland of Gyrodactylus salaris. Amendment 1, in the name of Ted Brocklebank, is grouped with amendments 1A and 15.
Mr Jamie McGrigor (Highlands and Islands) (Con):
Con
This Parliament passes laws on all sorts of things, but only rarely can we honestly say that it is faced with an issue as important as that of Gyrodactylus s...
Alasdair Morgan (South of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
Will the member give way?
Mr McGrigor:
Con
Presiding Officer, may I give way?
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
That is entirely at your discretion.
Mr McGrigor:
Con
I will happily give way.
Alasdair Morgan:
SNP
For the sake of other members, will Mr McGrigor explain precisely how proposed new section 5DA(1) of the Diseases of Fish Act 1937 is intended to work? How w...
Mr McGrigor:
Con
Presumably, if someone came to a Scottish airport, they would declare the items there. We would not have the power to make them declare the items at a UK air...
Richard Lochhead (Moray) (SNP):
SNP
I will speak to amendments 1A and 15. I agree with Jamie McGrigor, not only with regard to the fact that the Parliament makes lots of laws but on some of his...
The Minister for Environment and Rural Development (Ross Finnie):
LD
I do not disagree with Jamie McGrigor's point that Gyrodactylus salaris is an extremely important disease to deal with, and the Executive has no difficulty i...
Richard Lochhead:
SNP
I appreciate the fact that the minister has strong views on Ted Brocklebank's amendment. However, the SNP's amendment 1A simply asks ministers to report back...
Ross Finnie:
LD
I am addressing the amendments in the order in which they were spoken to. I know that Richard Lochhead is anxious for me to respond to his amendments, but he...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
Because the lead amendment is subject to amendment, we will have two winding-up speeches. Mr McGrigor will wind up the debate on amendment 1 and Mr Lochhead ...
Mr McGrigor:
Con
I listened closely to what Mr Finnie said, but I still think that we should take further measures to strengthen prevention of the parasite ever reaching Scot...