Hansard

That is very kind of you, Mr Fergusson.

I am sure that every member in the chamber will agree that Scotland is fortunate in having a thriving aquaculture industry, world-renowned salmon fishing rivers and a diverse marine and coastal environment. That places a responsibility on all of us to ensure that our marine ecosystems continue to provide economic, social and wider benefits for people, industry and society.

That responsibility underpins the primary purpose of the bill, which is to ensure that farmed and wild fisheries—and their interactions with each other—continue to be managed effectively as both sectors thrive. Critically, we wish to maximise their combined contribution to supporting sustainable economic growth in rural areas, but with due regard to the wider marine environment. Many and varied interests use and enjoy Scotland’s marine environment, and the quality of the environment is a key element of the market appeal of farmed salmon, trout and shellfish. Maintaining that shared pristine marine environment requires good neighbourliness.

Last week, I chaired the first meeting of the refreshed ministerial group on sustainable aquaculture. I hope and believe that the group will continue to be a forum where such consensus on shared issues can be reached. I have formed an interactions working group as part of the MGSA, and I believe that the group represents a new opportunity to move forward the shared agenda and to put aside some of the friction of the past. I expect the group to establish closer productive working relationships between wild fish interests and farmed fish interests, both locally and Scotland-wide, and to consider more broadly the significant benefits that both sectors can bring to rural and remote communities.

To what do those benefits equate? Well, we are dealing with a £600 million aquaculture sector that employs some 1,800 people in aquaculture production and almost 3,000 people in salmon processing. Similarly, game and coarse angling supports 2,800 full-time equivalent jobs and is worth £134 million in expenditure to the Scottish economy.

Much has been said—not least by the RACCE Committee—about the individual interests and positions that have been taken by stakeholders. I believe that that highlights the need to ensure that we get things right. I want to underline our intention to balance the many interests in the public interest, rather than responding in isolation to single-issue campaigns.

The Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee and others have asked for reassurance that the Scottish Government has actively engaged with stakeholders on the provisions in the bill. I confirm that stakeholder engagement has been an important part of our work since the consultation began and will continue to be so long after the provisions of the bill have been implemented.

For example, the wellboats working group has recently been established. Members of the group include wellboat operators, representatives of the fish farming companies, academics, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals—in respect of its Freedom Food Ltd assurance scheme—and the code of good practice management committee. The wellboats working group will work to establish the technical requirements for filters to control sea lice on all wellboats operating in Scotland, and for the facilities that will be needed for the new bigger wellboats that will be used in the future.

Colleagues have on occasion thrown—I am sure with good intent—what might usefully be described as a lifeline to save me from what they considered would be unintended consequences of the bill. Although I am always grateful for any such well-intentioned efforts to save me from danger, I consider that in this context the efforts have not been required. The bill has been developed over considerable time with substantial input from others and has rightly been subject to considerable scrutiny by Parliament. I assure members that, in formulating our amendments, we have given serious consideration to, and acted on, the issues that were raised. In my opinion, the bill is fit for purpose.

Part 1 of the bill will strengthen the regulatory framework for the fin-fish sector. Our aim is to support that industry as it continues to deliver its sustainable growth—using a 2011 baseline—of 50 per cent in volume to 2020 and beyond. That means a further 32 per cent growth from now.

During the passage of the bill, it was suggested—unfortunately, Tavish Scott is not in the chamber—that the provisions on farm management agreements are tantamount to micromanaging salmon farms. Although I share the desire to avoid micromanaging the sector, which Tavish Scott suggested might happen, I have not been convinced by that argument. I believe that the bill will not result in micromanagement; I stand by my conviction that the bill is balanced and proportionate.

The provisions will require that all fish farms in a farm management area be party to a farm management agreement or a farm management statement. Such agreements or statements must specify arrangements for a number of critical matters relating to fish health and welfare; namely fish health management, management of parasites, movement of live fish on and off farms, harvesting of fish, and fallowing of farms after harvesting.

At present, 98 per cent of fish farms are signed up to the industry code of good practice and are parties to agreements or statements. If the bill is passed, the provisions will apply to all marine fin-fish farm operators and will set the criteria that we consider are essential for managing the health of farmed fish within an area.

The issue of public reporting of sea lice has been discussed at considerable length during the progress of the bill and again today. I fully recognise that it is an issue of great concern to members. I hope that, even if members do not agree with the Government’s position, they will agree that we have clearly and consistently explained it.

We remain convinced that voluntary public reporting is the right route and that the proposals that the Scottish Salmon Producers Organisation has committed to taking forward—which it helpfully reaffirmed in a recent communication to all members—are appropriate from all perspectives: transparency, compliance, science and justifiable commercial interest. However, I repeat the commitment that I gave earlier to review the success or otherwise of the voluntary arrangement in the current session of Parliament. Crucially, we already have powers under the Aquaculture and Fisheries (Scotland) Act 2007 to implement a mandatory reporting arrangement, should that prove necessary.

Part 2 of the bill will improve the governance of district salmon fishery boards and strengthen management of salmon fisheries. Those are the first steps in delivering our manifesto commitment to modernise the management structures for salmon fisheries and freshwater fisheries, which is a complex area that has been the subject of numerous reports and investigations over the years. The committee took considerable interest in the issues on which more work was needed and provided helpful comments on what the forthcoming review should cover. Work is under way to scope the independent review that will be undertaken. My intention is that it will commence this summer, and I look forward to engaging with colleagues across Parliament and with all other interested parties on that.

Part 4 of the bill will introduce provisions to ensure continued protection of good water quality, which is necessary for a sustainable shellfish industry. We believe that the sector has potential, if it is managed with sensitivity to the environment. The shellfish industry, especially in respect of mussels, is looking to expand from a 2011 baseline by 100 per cent by 2020, which is another 80 per cent growth from now.

Work is under way to build on those provisions, with the aim of consulting on draft regulations for introduction in the autumn. The regulations will introduce a system of quality standards that will bring together environmental standards for good water quality with the food hygiene standards that are required for high-quality shellfish products. That will be a first in Europe and will help to cement Scotland’s reputation for the quality of its produce.

It is a rare treat for any minister to be praised by the Opposition for introducing legislation, so I shall treasure Alex Fergusson’s comments during the committee’s consideration of the Solway cockles provisions. That reflects the genuine consensus that there is a serious issue that merits Government action. I was pleased to see widespread coverage in the media of police and Marine Scotland officers stepping up the patrols to tackle illegal cockling on the Solway Firth. I am sure that we would all prefer to deter people from illegal and potentially dangerous cockling than to use the powers that we seek in the bill, but it has, regrettably, proved to be necessary to take decisive steps to address the issue.

It would perhaps be remiss of me, while speaking about Solway cockles, not to mention the wider improvements in enforcement measures that are included in the bill. The Fisheries Act 1705 makes certain provisions for the

“good subjects of this Kingdom”,

or the people of Scotland, to fish in the seas around our coastline. That act of the old Scottish Parliament perhaps underlines how important Scotland’s seas are to the people of Scotland.