Hansard

I am delighted to have the opportunity to speak in the debate. My colleague Jamie Greene had hoped to participate, as the area that is covered by Peel Ports falls within his West Scotland region rather than mine. Nonetheless, I know many owners of leisure craft in my South Scotland region who will be affected by the proposals, and Mr Greene and I are aligned in our views on them.

I am grateful to Stuart McMillan for bringing the debate to the chamber and for his efforts, through the CPG on recreational boating and marine tourism, to highlight this unfair, ill-thought-through and ignorant proposal from Peel Ports, to which—as members might have gathered—I am utterly opposed.

Although I recognise that Peel Ports has the right to impose reasonable fees and charges to cover its costs relating to services and upkeep within the Clydeport area, the proposals are far from reasonable. More than that, they have the potential to cause significant harm to the area, damaging marine tourism, deterring investment and, in my view, potentially impacting public health by creating barriers to access. The lack of public engagement and public consultation by Peel Ports is hugely disappointing and only serves to reinforce the view that it is acting in a high-handed way with no consideration for the wider impacts that the decision will have.

Turning to my point on the public health impact of the proposal, many of the smaller craft that will be impacted by the proposals are not superyachts or gin palaces; they are small sailing craft that are crewed by members of the public who enjoy a day out on the water as a way of being active or to relax. Many of them are coastal rowing skiffs that are built by members of the community and rowed for fun or competition.

I am particularly aggravated by the idea that community groups such as coastal rowing clubs could be affected by the plan. Those are exactly the kind of community groups that I want to see more of. They offer a welcoming environment in which people of all ages and abilities can learn new skills, make new friends and keep fit. Sadly for them, their main rowing skiffs are longer than 6m, so they will now have to stump up to Peel Ports if they want to regularly row anywhere north of Irvine. The dozens of other clubs in Scotland that might visit the area to compete in a regatta will be hooked for a visitor fee.

I understand the position that Peel Ports is in. Its costs are rising and it argues that it has issues dealing with abandoned vessels and wrecks. However, all those vessels belong to someone and those individuals should be pursued for the costs. Responsible owners and seafarers should not be punished for the negligence of a few.

Scotland is an island and seafaring nation. Whether for leisure or commerce, seafaring is an important part of our history and culture. Leisure boaters take to the sea for many reasons: some for the challenge of pitting themselves against the elements or fellow sailors in competition, some for the camaraderie of meeting others with a shared passion, and many simply for fun. Whatever the reason, we should be encouraging more people to enjoy the pleasures that boating has to offer, not putting up barriers.

Peel Ports does not have to listen to the outcry from organisations such as the Royal Yachting Association or a number of local boating organisations that have objected to the plans. However, if it does not listen and if it does not change course, it will do profound harm to communities up and down the Firth of Clyde. I once again thank my colleague Stuart McMillan for bringing this issue to the chamber.