Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 15 May 2013

15 May 2013 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament

Item of business

Aquaculture and Fisheries (Scotland) Bill

Baker, Claire Lab Mid Scotland and Fife Watch on SPTV

The bill has been an attempt to address some of the issues surrounding wild fisheries and the aquaculture sector. Although the debate is an opportunity to reflect on what has been agreed, it is also—as other members have highlighted—the time to turn to questions of implementation and what happens next. Following the initial consultation, a number of contentious issues were not taken forward in the bill—for example, carcass tagging and salmon netting rights—but they must be addressed, and the future work streams that others who are involved in wild fisheries and sustainable aquaculture have highlighted are essential.

As the minister said, 98 per cent of fish farms are signed up to good practice, which raises the question whether the bill is about consolidating what already happens rather than addressing some of the key issues that Alex Fergusson highlighted. We have a growing aquaculture sector that makes a significant contribution to Scotland’s economy nationally and locally. It is a business that provides employment in rural areas—more than 6,000 people are employed, often in long-term, skilled jobs. The amendments on training were welcome. We recognise that people work in difficult conditions, and that standards of training and health and safety must be high.

Achieving the target of increasing the production of all farmed fish by 50 per cent from a 2011 baseline by 2020 is ambitious. If we are to achieve that rate of expansion, we need to be sure that the regulatory system that is in place is robust and has the confidence of consumers and wider interests. In recent weeks, there have been reports that pesticides from 12 salmon farms have contaminated lochs around Scotland’s coast in breach of safety limits. Since 2010, such incidents have been the subject of an annual report by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, which consistently raises questions about the environmental impact of fish farming.

Labour has sought to take a proportionate approach to the bill. At stage 1, the committee debated at length the publication of sea lice data. There was certainly recognition that there could be greater transparency and information sharing, and Labour lodged a consensus amendment, so it is disappointing that, once again, the evidence that was heard at stage 1 and supported in the stage 1 report has been rejected at the amendment stage on the minister’s recommendation. We have seen committee members twisting and turning on the issue this afternoon.

We recognise that the industry is to increase its reporting to 30 areas of data, but the international perception of Scottish salmon relies on its reputation for comparatively high standards of health and welfare for farmed fish. Greater transparency should be nothing to fear and would only strengthen its reputation. The industry and the minister raise concerns regarding commercial risk, but it is argued that no other industry is protected in this way, and the strongest comments on the matter came from SEPA. It is disappointing that those concerns have not been addressed in the bill and there has been such reluctance on the Government’s part to take a stronger lead on the issue. Although the minister has given a commitment to review the success or otherwise of the SSPO proposals on sea lice data publication, it is not clear how that success will be judged. He might want to give an indication of that in his closing remarks.

It is crucial that the right level of regulation is in place for the sector. No one in the debate today wants regulation that would damage the industry, but there have been calls for proportionate regulation that protects consumer confidence, in recognition of the fact that across our food chain there is—perhaps now more than ever—a need for transparency and robust governance.

Search Hansard contributions

Meeting of the Parliament 15 May 2013

In the same item of business