Hansard

I am delighted to be able to participate in this, the final stage of the Marine (Scotland) Bill. Its long process, which began in the previous parliamentary session, has now finally come to a conclusion.

The fact that the amended bill is stronger than the one that we began with is down to many people, in both Parliament and civic Scotland. Other members have named them; I simply add my thanks for their advice, information and support in scrutinising and seeking to amend the bill. In particular, I put on record my thanks to the clerks to the Rural Affairs and Environment Committee, especially Peter McGrath and Roz Wheeler, who worked round the clock to ensure that the stage 3 amendments were properly drafted and did what we intended them to do, even if we sometimes did not really know what that was. When I received my final daily list at 1 o'clock in the morning on Saturday, I thought that they had gone above and beyond the call of duty in their provision of support.

Unlike other members of the committee, as MSP for Clydesdale, I represent a constituency that has no coastline—it is probably one of the largest land-locked constituencies in Scotland—so, in many ways, I was at the mercy of those who gave evidence to the committee. That had its advantages, as I was able to consider the evidence and to seek a balance without having any particular constituency interest.

I am pleased that I was able successfully to amend the bill to ensure that present or future ministers can take into account the socioeconomic consequences of the designation of nature conservation MPAs. I believe that the relevant provision gives ministers the necessary flexibility, although I agree that it should be used only in exceptional circumstances—in that regard, I welcome the clarification that the minister gave in his letter to the committee. I am also delighted that even though they argued against the exclusion of fishing from the licensing provisions, SNP members decided, at the 11th hour, to vote with the Labour Party. That conversion is to be welcomed.

There are some issues that I want to draw to the minister's attention and on which he might be able to provide further evidence in his concluding remarks. The first is the transfer of section 36 consent functions from the Scottish Government's energy consents unit to Marine Scotland. It is felt that the expertise that currently exists in the energy consents unit needs to be retained and that, to avoid delays and barriers to renewable developments in the marine environment, clarity on the transitional arrangements would be welcome. On land, it has taken some time for us to build up such expertise and the process has now become a bit quicker. There is concern in the renewables sector that if that expertise is not transferred, we risk making the process slightly longer than is necessary. Perhaps the cabinet secretary could look at that.

The second issue is that of historic MPAs, which I raised during the consideration of amendments. I understand that the Scottish Government seeks to develop an interim spatial plan for the Pentland Firth with a view to facilitating marine renewable developments, and that it wants to work positively with all parties. It would be helpful if, when that marine spatial plan is available, it could be presented to the committee, so that we could be fully informed of all the complex areas relating to its development. In all such matters, a balance needs to be struck between fishing, marine interests, renewables and conservation. It will be helpful for the committee to look at the spatial plan as it develops to assess whether we are getting the balance right. The bill includes a five-year recall clause, so we will be able to assess how it has developed over the five years.