Hansard

I thank all members across the chamber for their contributions to the debate on Scotland’s first national marine plan, which has been many years in the making. Although I accept that we may have improvements to make—that is the purpose of the committee’s work—I am laying a draft plan before Parliament for comment. This a first, and I hope that when we look back in a few years’ time it will be taken as the norm that Scotland has a national marine plan and I hope that Scotland will move forward and get all the benefits from it.

We all support having a thriving marine environment, which we all want to safeguard for biodiversity reasons, the environmental benefits and so on. At the same time, of course, we want to promote sustainable economic development in our seas, given that the industries that thrive in our seas sustain tens of thousands of jobs onshore and at sea.

The plan is about industries and it is also about the people who use our seas for work or leisure. In that regard, I join those members who paid tribute to the RNLI in Scotland. Of course, as we saw recently, it had a record number of call-outs last year. It is doing a grand job and its volunteers often put their own safety on the line for others.

The 2012 Scottish annual business statistics demonstrated that the core marine sector alone is worth £4.5 billion to the Scottish economy and employs almost 50,000 people. That includes oil and gas services, but not oil and gas extraction, which of course accounts for more billions of pounds of revenue and thousands more jobs. Over and above that, we have our fishing and aquaculture sectors: major players that contribute hundreds of millions of pounds to our economy and safeguard local jobs in some of the more remote parts of Scotland, as many members mentioned. Our seas also provide Scotland with energy and will do so more in the future: 25 per cent of Europe’s tidal and offshore wind power and 10 per cent of Europe’s wave power can be found in Scottish waters. There is massive potential there. In terms of our seas, Scotland is in many regards a leading player globally.

Stakeholders and others who input to the process over the past few years have played a huge role. I am glad that they welcome much of where we have got to with the first marine plan. Bertie Armstrong of SFF said:

“In general terms, we are pleased with what has come out.”

The Crown Estate said:

“it provides a good vision for Scotland’s seas.”

The British Ports Association said:

“We very much welcome the document”.

Professor Thomas, from the Scottish Salmon Producers’ Organisation, said:

“The plan is probably more advanced than those in any other European Union region.”

Although I ask Professor Thomas to take note that Scotland is a nation, not a region, he makes a fair point in his comments. The representative of marine scientists, Lucy Greenhill, said:

“The main benefit that the marine plan and process could provide is the ability to assess cumulative impacts across multiple sectors.”—[Official Report, Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee, 7 January 2015; c 2-5.]

Despite some of the comments about the need for improvement on some aspects of the draft plan, which I accept and will come on to, generally the stakeholders, with whom we have worked very closely over many years, have welcomed where we have got to with the plan.

There have been many comments about making the plan simpler, which I take on board. As we prepare to adopt the final plan we will see how we can make it simpler, easier to read and so on. However, I gently point out that the only plan produced in England so far is a regional plan—it is not even the national plan—and it goes to 190 pages. Ours is only 133 pages, and we represent 60 per cent of UK waters—the lion’s share. We accept that a lot of detail must go into the plan, but perhaps it is already more streamlined and simplified than those in other parts of these islands.

As I said, we have an open mind on improvements to the plan, and I take seriously the comments made by the committee and members who have spoken in today’s debate. There have been a range of issues. Local authorities’ possible lack of expertise to implement the plan has been highlighted, which we take seriously. I point out that we have seven coastal partnerships in Scotland already and the Scottish Government funds project officers who work with coastal partnerships on these kinds of issues. As Tavish Scott and others said, Shetland will be one of the first two areas for regional planning and no one would argue with the idea that Shetland has a lot of expertise in dealing with the kinds of issues that we are speaking about today. As the years progress and more regional plans are put in place, we will have to develop expertise at the local level, but there is a lot there already and we must ensure that we use that and bring it together.

Many members mentioned conflict resolution and the issue of whether one activity should trump another. It is very difficult to lay down a general rule, because we have to look at each case on a case-by-case basis. Marine Scotland will play the role of broker when there is potential conflict at local level.

We will also monitor the plan constantly to make sure that it is adapted when necessary and that it is working. There is a five-year review timescale, although some members have said that that should be reduced to three years. We will consider that, but the renewable energy and other sectors say that there should be stability and if we keep on having reviews, that could make the situation less stable. We must take those views into account as well.

The question about whether we should go for enhancement and not just protection of marine features is also part of the debate around marine protected areas. That question will be taken forward as part of the marine bill in due course. As members know, we have just consulted on the management options for the MPAs.