Hansard

I could shout, but I had better not. I take it that the volume is better now, Presiding Officer. I will start again so that you can hear the whole thrust of the wisdom of my words.

I welcome the principle of the Scottish Government adopting a national marine plan to provide guidance to decision makers and users of Scotland’s marine environment. The draft NMP’s vision for the marine environment strives to ensure clean, healthy, safe, productive and diverse seas that are managed to meet the long-term needs of nature and people. That is admirable and I congratulate the Government on its work so far.

I want to mention the recent grounding of the ship on Ardnamurchan point near Kilchoan in my constituency, which the cabinet secretary and one or two other speakers mentioned. Fortunately, the ship’s crew are safe, there is little apparent pollution from the grounding and it looks as if it will be possible to get the ship off the rocks all right.

However, as the cabinet secretary said, the incident highlights the need for a tug on the west coast. We are vulnerable at present and might not be so lucky the next time. Tavish Scott said that he agrees with the principle of having tugs but not with the rhetoric that he heard around it, but I remind him that I agree with the principle and the reality that it is the Conservative-Liberal Government that is presiding over a situation where we have only one tug, based in Shetland, when everyone with any sense knows that we need two, including one in the Minch. I hope that he will support that point much more strongly than he has done until now.

The marine plan is primarily designed to protect Scotland’s sustainable future. That is a great idea; I would not support activities that were to the detriment of our natural heritage. However, we must also safeguard the livelihoods of those in our coastal communities. The RACCE Committee, of which I am a member, feels that the Government must ensure as the plan develops that appropriate safeguards are put in place to outline rights and responsibilities clearly, without being too highly restrictive.

I endorse my committee colleagues’ comments about our concerns, which I am sure the cabinet secretary is addressing. In particular, I urge the cabinet secretary to ensure that, as other speakers have said, regional marine planning is married properly to the national plan and relevant guidance is given to local authorities, which must also be adequately resourced. I am grateful that the cabinet secretary acknowledged that concern.

It is good news that, after initial reservations, the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation is much more satisfied with the plan. The SFF believes that most of its concerns have been addressed, so it is now much happier with the plan.

I am very supportive of sustainable fishing activities in our waters. Our fishing fleets are major users of the marine environment and have a vital role to play economically and socially. However, that role must be balanced against protecting the environment. I have some reservations about scallop dredging in that regard. I feel that safeguards need to be and should be put in place.

I am pleased that the three scallopers who are members of the Mallaig and North West Fishermen’s Association, which also contributed to the consultation, are fairly relaxed about the consequences for their businesses of the plan. Given their vast experience, that puts me at some ease. They are relaxed about the NMP, so long as a suitable impact assessment is applied to any detailed proposals that come forward on their sector of the industry.

There has been concern about the inclusion in the planning policies of targets for the growth of aquaculture. Those targets must be subject to strategic environmental assessment and habitat regulation assessment to ensure that the level of growth can be achieved within environmental limits.

Although climate change impacts are noted for every other sector in the plan, there is no mention of the climate change impacts of the oil and gas sector. That is not in keeping with the Government’s commitment to reducing the carbon footprint.

As the RACCE Committee has noted, as members have said and as I have alluded to, local authorities are not equipped to deliver marine planning effectively. That must be addressed as a matter of urgency. As I have said, I am pleased that the cabinet secretary has expressed his willingness to do that.

Regional marine planning and the governance of the decision-making bodies that are required to deliver the plans must be well resourced, as that will facilitate efficiency and streamlined management at regional and national levels. Scottish Environment LINK, which Claudia Beamish mentioned, also takes that view. LINK, which is the forum for Scotland’s voluntary environmental organisations, has more than 35 member bodies that represent a broad spectrum of environmental interests. It aims to ensure that the environment is fully recognised in the development of policy and legislation that affect Scotland. LINK has a common goal with the RACCE Committee and the Scottish Government, which is to contribute to a more environmentally sustainable society. I support that goal.

I would like to insist that the cabinet secretary ensures that the final plan is effectively monitored and assessed. I therefore recommend that the Scottish Government revisits the document with a view to streamlining the information that is provided. That will ensure that the final national marine plan stands as a clear overarching framework for decision makers that can be applied evenly across the country. I echo the comments of my colleagues on the RACCE Committee that the online interactive version of the plan, which is to be established, should be a first-class authoritative source for all of Scotland’s marine areas. That will keep arrangements fluid between regional and national bodies, enhance accessibility for all concerned and engender the public’s trust.