Chamber
Plenary, 20 Mar 2008
20 Mar 2008 · S3 · Plenary
Item of business
Marine Environment
The marine management organisation is where we should sort that out. That is why I would like to get on to debating the bill, because the MMO will need to have a UK level but it should also have a Scottish level. There are different models that we could use; the AGMACS recommendations accepted that there is more than one way to make the system work. I hope that the MMO will be accountable to us in the Parliament, so that there will be a Scottish MMO as well as a UK MMO. That is entirely possible and it is what we should look to achieve.
We have taken our marine environment for granted. The marine bill gives us an opportunity to examine how we manage the potential conflicts and the potential opportunities that come from better and more intelligent strategic planning. We need to find better ways of protecting and managing our marine life, because we must protect species and the habitats that maintain them. That is why the recommendation from AGMACS that we should base our marine nature conservation on scientific advice, with specific measures for species conservation, policy and site protection is crucial. We need to meet our biodiversity commitments, both at the Scottish level and at UK level. It is crucial that we also take into account socioeconomic considerations, so that we get sustainability in our seas.
We must draw together a Scottish set of marine ecosystem objectives. I would like the minister, when he sums up, to talk about the progress that has been made. AGMACS hoped for progress to be made in 2007—it will be interesting to see how that has gone. That needs to work in both the regional seas round Scotland and the wider UK waters.
We need to ensure that we have the right vehicle for marine spatial planning. We support the AGMACS suggestion that the Scottish marine management organisation should have responsibility for marine nature conservation and fisheries to 200 nautical miles and that it should be nested in a UK system or framework. We think that that would ensure the benefits of both worlds under devolution. We would be part of the wider UK system but could also play to our strengths. In our most recent debate on fisheries, it was clear that when we link sustainable development to fisheries and marine conservation, we achieve sensible outcomes. That is the way we should go.
There is more than one way to deliver that outcome, which is why we are not specific in our amendment—I hope that Mike Rumbles will not be overly specific at this stage either. We need to give the minister breathing space to negotiate the best way to make it all happen in practice. We should be looking to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to work in partnership with the Scottish Government and to devolve the responsibilities to us without a big constitutional stand-off. That would make sense.
We need to consider the statutory basis of marine spatial planning as recommended by AGMACS. It suggested a three-tier approach involving a top level led by the UK MMO, with a connection to Scotland so that we are involved in the discussions. The pilot involving the UK Government, Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Ireland is the right model to examine—we need co-operation among the devolved and other Administrations. We also need a bottom tier that is genuinely local. I hope that we can build on the partnerships that already exist in Scotland and ensure that local stakeholders' expertise is brought to the fore in the priority areas.
We need a joined-up approach because, whatever we put in our marine bill and whatever is in the UK and Northern Ireland bills, that is unlikely to be the end of the story. We should ensure at least that those three bills join up. The work done on the proposed climate change legislation gives us a model for making progress. The UK bill is ahead of ours. A climate change consultation paper is out in Scotland, but the two bills are not progressing in sync through the Parliaments. However, it is possible to ensure that they link together. That is the model that we are looking for with the marine bill as well.
We are dealing with a complex situation, but the bill needs to signpost how the process will work. It does not need to be overly detailed because some of the detail will come in secondary legislation after the main bill is passed. We need to reach the point of testing it among stakeholders and through the parliamentary process.
We are keen to get on with the work because, until we get the bill, we will not get our national network of marine protected sites or the delivery of the governance structures to ensure that our marine environment is properly protected and able to enjoy the sustainable development that we all want. We will not get a marine and coastal national park until we get the marine bill—that was one condition that ministers put on developing a marine national park. It was evident last week that ministers are now thinking about where we go next on national parks. I hope that the marine element is not missed out.
We need to have a bit more urgency and to reach the point at which we can debate the powers in the bill. We support ministers in doing that work and will engage constructively in the process. We think that AGMACS provided a good framework, and we look forward to seeing the consultation on the bill. However, we stress that we need an intelligent, joined-up and mature discussion throughout the UK. Although our waters are special, they are part of wider waters as well. There are unique aspects of the Scottish environment that we need to protect, but we must also join up with our colleagues throughout the rest of the UK and Europe, because the seas are a wider resource for Europe's environment as a whole.
I move amendment S3M-1602.2, to insert at end:
"calls on the Scottish Government to accelerate the timetable for the Marine Bill, and further calls on Scottish Ministers to work constructively with the UK Government and other administrations to ensure that an integrated and joined-up approach to new legislation and its implementation are achieved."
We have taken our marine environment for granted. The marine bill gives us an opportunity to examine how we manage the potential conflicts and the potential opportunities that come from better and more intelligent strategic planning. We need to find better ways of protecting and managing our marine life, because we must protect species and the habitats that maintain them. That is why the recommendation from AGMACS that we should base our marine nature conservation on scientific advice, with specific measures for species conservation, policy and site protection is crucial. We need to meet our biodiversity commitments, both at the Scottish level and at UK level. It is crucial that we also take into account socioeconomic considerations, so that we get sustainability in our seas.
We must draw together a Scottish set of marine ecosystem objectives. I would like the minister, when he sums up, to talk about the progress that has been made. AGMACS hoped for progress to be made in 2007—it will be interesting to see how that has gone. That needs to work in both the regional seas round Scotland and the wider UK waters.
We need to ensure that we have the right vehicle for marine spatial planning. We support the AGMACS suggestion that the Scottish marine management organisation should have responsibility for marine nature conservation and fisheries to 200 nautical miles and that it should be nested in a UK system or framework. We think that that would ensure the benefits of both worlds under devolution. We would be part of the wider UK system but could also play to our strengths. In our most recent debate on fisheries, it was clear that when we link sustainable development to fisheries and marine conservation, we achieve sensible outcomes. That is the way we should go.
There is more than one way to deliver that outcome, which is why we are not specific in our amendment—I hope that Mike Rumbles will not be overly specific at this stage either. We need to give the minister breathing space to negotiate the best way to make it all happen in practice. We should be looking to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to work in partnership with the Scottish Government and to devolve the responsibilities to us without a big constitutional stand-off. That would make sense.
We need to consider the statutory basis of marine spatial planning as recommended by AGMACS. It suggested a three-tier approach involving a top level led by the UK MMO, with a connection to Scotland so that we are involved in the discussions. The pilot involving the UK Government, Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Ireland is the right model to examine—we need co-operation among the devolved and other Administrations. We also need a bottom tier that is genuinely local. I hope that we can build on the partnerships that already exist in Scotland and ensure that local stakeholders' expertise is brought to the fore in the priority areas.
We need a joined-up approach because, whatever we put in our marine bill and whatever is in the UK and Northern Ireland bills, that is unlikely to be the end of the story. We should ensure at least that those three bills join up. The work done on the proposed climate change legislation gives us a model for making progress. The UK bill is ahead of ours. A climate change consultation paper is out in Scotland, but the two bills are not progressing in sync through the Parliaments. However, it is possible to ensure that they link together. That is the model that we are looking for with the marine bill as well.
We are dealing with a complex situation, but the bill needs to signpost how the process will work. It does not need to be overly detailed because some of the detail will come in secondary legislation after the main bill is passed. We need to reach the point of testing it among stakeholders and through the parliamentary process.
We are keen to get on with the work because, until we get the bill, we will not get our national network of marine protected sites or the delivery of the governance structures to ensure that our marine environment is properly protected and able to enjoy the sustainable development that we all want. We will not get a marine and coastal national park until we get the marine bill—that was one condition that ministers put on developing a marine national park. It was evident last week that ministers are now thinking about where we go next on national parks. I hope that the marine element is not missed out.
We need to have a bit more urgency and to reach the point at which we can debate the powers in the bill. We support ministers in doing that work and will engage constructively in the process. We think that AGMACS provided a good framework, and we look forward to seeing the consultation on the bill. However, we stress that we need an intelligent, joined-up and mature discussion throughout the UK. Although our waters are special, they are part of wider waters as well. There are unique aspects of the Scottish environment that we need to protect, but we must also join up with our colleagues throughout the rest of the UK and Europe, because the seas are a wider resource for Europe's environment as a whole.
I move amendment S3M-1602.2, to insert at end:
"calls on the Scottish Government to accelerate the timetable for the Marine Bill, and further calls on Scottish Ministers to work constructively with the UK Government and other administrations to ensure that an integrated and joined-up approach to new legislation and its implementation are achieved."
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Alasdair Morgan):
SNP
The next item of business is a debate on motion S3M-1602, in the name of Richard Lochhead, on Scotland's marine environment.
The Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment (Richard Lochhead):
SNP
The sea has defined and shaped Scotland and sustained our communities and nation since time immemorial. Our relationship with the sea has helped to forge our...
Sarah Boyack (Edinburgh Central) (Lab):
Lab
The bottom line, which came across strongly in the cabinet secretary's speech, is that we have had a lot of discussions to date. There has been a huge amount...
Mike Rumbles (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD):
LD
Does the member agree that, in such a complicated scenario, which raises both devolved and reserved issues, it would be much better, simpler and more effecti...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
The marine management organisation is where we should sort that out. That is why I would like to get on to debating the bill, because the MMO will need to ha...
Mike Rumbles (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD):
LD
It is crucial that coastal and marine-based activity is managed in a sustainable way that integrates socioeconomic and environmental factors for the long-ter...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
There is quite a range of UK bodies that have clear accountability to the Scottish Parliament. There are different models that we can use. Is Mike Rumbles su...
Mike Rumbles:
LD
No, I am not, despite SNP members tempting me to say that I am. I am suggesting that we should have devolved responsibility for planning in the marine spatia...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
I was absolutely clear that we fully support all the AGMACS recommendations. We did not have to put that into the amendment because there are a lot of recomm...
Mike Rumbles:
LD
Sarah Boyack does not want to go down the same route as the Liberal Democrats. In this case, she is not as environmentally friendly as we are, and it is impo...
Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green):
Green
I am delighted that the marine environment is being discussed in the chamber. I will support Sarah Boyack's and Mike Rumbles's amendments, which are not mutu...
John Scott (Ayr) (Con):
Con
Today's debate on Scotland's marine environment is welcome and has been surprisingly consensual thus far, notwithstanding the best efforts of Mike Rumbles to...
Dave Thompson (Highlands and Islands) (SNP):
SNP
The marine bill debate raises a number of issues, including the need for enhanced environmental protection that respects the rich diversity of our marine lif...
Jamie McGrigor (Highlands and Islands) (Con):
Con
I appreciate the importance of caged fish farms. However, does the member agree that escapes, such as recently occurred in Loch Etive, can be detrimental to ...
Dave Thompson:
SNP
I agree that escapes from fish farms can be a serious problem. We must ensure that they are kept to a minimum.Marine parks could, however, bring many benefit...
Peter Peacock (Highlands and Islands) (Lab):
Lab
Like other members, I welcome this debate and hope that it allows ministers to accelerate the progress of what, in its attempt to rationalise all the institu...
Kenneth Gibson (Cunninghame North) (SNP):
SNP
I have a constituency that has extensive coastline and sizeable island and coastal communities, so I welcome this important debate on Scotland's marine envir...
Helen Eadie (Dunfermline East) (Lab):
Lab
I support all that was said by my colleague Sarah Boyack and I support the amendment in her name.The first thing that hit me when I started to explore the is...
Rob Gibson (Highlands and Islands) (SNP):
SNP
At this stage of a debate, most of the arguments have usually been made. In this debate there has been consensus among members on the broad principles. There...
Mike Rumbles:
LD
My point was about expectations. The cabinet secretary said nine months ago that he would announce plans for a bill soon, and I wanted to urge him forward.
Rob Gibson:
SNP
I thank the member for his friendly intervention. My point is that the number of people that the Government can deploy on such issues is limited, so we shoul...
Robin Harper:
Green
Does Rob Gibson acknowledge the real difference between the amount of disruption that is caused by, for instance, an offshore wind farm close to or in the Mo...
Rob Gibson:
SNP
We have to sort out such issues. In order to achieve balance, we will have to put in place an organisation such as we are discussing. In the meantime, we wil...
Elaine Murray (Dumfries) (Lab):
Lab
I disagree slightly with Kenneth Gibson's allegation that the previous Executive did absolutely nothing about our marine environment for about 96 months. I a...
Jamie Hepburn (Central Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
Members will need to forgive me if my voice crackles a little today. It comes from urging Partick Thistle on to its well-deserved draw at Ibrox last night. T...
Robin Harper:
Green
This has been an interesting and important debate. As I reflect on what has been said in relation to the UK position, I note that our SNP colleagues—quite ri...
Jim Hume (South of Scotland) (LD):
LD
The debate has highlighted our marine and coastal environment, which contains many special and some unique landscapes of national and international renown. A...
The Minister for Environment (Michael Russell):
SNP
Beam me up.
Jim Hume:
LD
I wish they would beam me up, Mr Russell.Liberal Democrats welcome any proposal for a marine national park, which was mentioned by Sarah Boyack and John Scot...
Karen Gillon (Clydesdale) (Lab):
Lab
Why will the Liberal Democrats vote against an amendment that seeks to speed up the process? That is exactly what the member is calling for.