Hansard

Thanks to those who supported the motion and the debate and to everyone who provided briefings. Despite championing our world-class seafood, the Scottish Government last held a debate on fisheries in 2022. The sector makes a significant contribution to Scotland’s economy and to our coastal communities.

As a representative of Shetland, where fishing is of such economic and cultural importance, I cannot speak about the industry without referring to the recent sad passing of the senior fisheries policy adviser at UHI Shetland. Dr Ian Napier was a highly respected scientist and long-time supporter of Shetland’s fishing industry. He made a significant contribution to the industry, not least with his work on the Shetland Islands Regulated Fishery (Scotland) Order 1999, which, some 25 years later, is held up as a good example of local inshore fisheries management. Ian Napier’s sudden passing is mourned across the community and industry, by his friends and colleagues at UHI Shetland and, most of all, by his family. To them, I extend my deepest sympathy.

A recent global survey deemed fishing to be the most dangerous job in the world. I pay tribute to all the fishermen across the United Kingdom, many of whom are in the Shetland fleet. Fishing is a way of life, with family businesses, knowledge and skills passed down from generation to generation. Fishermen are custodians of our seas and stakeholders in its wellbeing, and they are invested in a sustainable future. However, fishing is becoming increasingly challenging. Without those who harvest the nutritious, healthy fish, the economy and food security would suffer.

On numerous occasions, I have raised concerns about the level of Scottish Government investment in Scotland’s marine directorate, which I believe is inadequately resourced given all that is asked of it. Fisheries protection, marine protection, renewable energy, scientific research and data gathering are all necessary for future policy making.

We have seen traditional fishing areas lost to at-sea infrastructure. Since the discovery of North Sea oil and gas, more than 50 years ago, we have had a growing renewable energy sector, with sites set to host vast swathes of offshore wind farms. Climate change is real, but so, too, is spatial squeeze. In its briefing to members the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation stated:

“Successful, viable and long-standing businesses will lose access to vast tracts of the seabed where they have fished effectively and efficiently for decades. These areas have remained productive for many years but are now set to be lost to food production as they become industrialised with floating offshore wind farms where it will be practically impossible for fishing to continue due to the physical infrastructure of the windfarm.”

Offshore wind power cannot happen at the expense of fishing. A transition is not just if it ends up squeezing the life out of viable fishing businesses.

In October 2022, Shetland experienced serious damage to sea bed telecommunication cables, which impacted all aspects of island life. There are also safety issues. Hauling up a cable could result in the loss of a vessel or, worse, the loss of lives. National security is important in a volatile world where foreign powers might seek to undertake acts of disruption. I therefore reiterate my support for the creation of cable corridors to co-ordinate cables from offshore wind turbines, interconnectors and telecoms to run along designated routes.

Yesterday, I was in Whalsay, where Shetland’s pelagic fleet is based. The island community there is built around centuries of fishing—it is the epitome of a successful fishing community. I heard at first hand of the impact of the Scottish economic link licence condition. The fish landings obligation requires pelagic vessels to land 55 per cent of their catch at Scottish ports. If they do not, they have to return quota to the Scottish Government. To the uninitiated, that might seem a reasonable ask, to benefit the wider Scottish economy, but when unintended consequences are not addressed they affect the fleet, its landings and income and, ultimately, the country’s economy.

Uncertainty about the future in turn stalls further vessel investment and creates delay in replacing retiring crew or bringing in new, young talent. I heard an example of what can happen during the short summer herring season. Four pelagic processing factories operate in Scotland, and vessels that are not tied to a specific processor can find themselves vying for a time to land their catch. Waits of up to four days to land are not unknown, which impacts the quality of the catch and causes delay in returning to fishing grounds. Herring waits for no one. Steaming to Norway, where the price difference can be as much as £300 per tonne, to land a catch can save time and money, despite the costs and environmental impact of increased fuel usage. I understand that a Scottish Government review of the impact of the amended economic link provisions is under way. When the cabinet secretary responds to the debate, it would be helpful if she could indicate when that report will be published.

I recognise the time constraints on the debate, so I will conclude by mentioning that other challenges exist. They include the dangerous actions of other vessels at sea, such as the widely reported incidents involving the Pesorsa Dos and the Antonia Maria; the trade and co-operation agreement—TCA—negotiations; marine planning and marine protected areas; marine pollution; ghost gear; and the impact of dumping at sea on fish, seabirds, cetaceans and other marine life. There is so much to say, but, should the Scottish Government initiate a fisheries debate within the remainder of the parliamentary term, there will be a further opportunity to expand on all those important matters.