Hansard

There are a few points there on which I have been engaging with Finlay Carson. He will be aware that there was an increase in the science budget of the marine directorate—if that is what he is referring to—earlier this year.

We have reflected many times on the partnership work that is needed to deliver effective fisheries and marine management. Our collaborative approach has worked well for the development of fisheries management measures for offshore marine protected areas—MPAs—where we have taken a balanced and pragmatic approach. That collaboration is always important, and never more so than when we are facing difficult challenges and choices. In my time as fisheries minister, I have seen the resilience that the fishing industry has displayed in the face of unprecedented challenges and during recent periods of upheaval and uncertainty. Our industry is facing a very challenging year ahead.

There is no getting away from the challenging advice that applies across the north-east Atlantic. Substantial cuts are proposed by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea—ICES—for a range of species, which, if enacted, will have far-reaching social and economic impacts on our fishermen and processors. I have already expressed those concerns to ministers at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

The ICES advice is challenging for a number of our key stocks this year, not least the iconic stocks of cod and mackerel. Many factors might be contributing to that, such as natural mortality, climate impacts and low recruitment across the north-east Atlantic. Our stocks are jointly managed with the fishing nations around us, with total allowable catches agreed annually, varying from year to year based on the science. Change is not unusual, but it is the scale of it that makes it feel different on many levels this year.

Fish stocks are oblivious to lines on maps, and it is crucial that the UK works with its coastal state partners to find joint solutions that ensure the sustainability of both our fish stocks and our catching and processing sectors. Negotiations on 2026 fishing opportunities are already well under way, and I am in regular contact with our negotiators as they work to represent and promote Scottish interests.

I wish to spend a bit of time outlining my objectives for mackerel and cod. North Sea cod is not collapsing, but if we do not proceed with equal attention to biomass recovery and TAC constraints across a number of stocks found in the same fishery, we will be risking the viability of Scottish white-fish vessels. The ICES advice shows a stark picture of the health of the southern sub-stock, and that is primarily what is driving down the levels in the overall advice.

ICES is attempting to manage the whole northern shelf stock based on the depleted state of the southern stock. It is my view that the priority in those negotiations must be the immediate implementation of spatial management measures that restrict potential catches of the southern stock. We already have significant measures in place in Scottish waters, and we will urgently review them to see what improvements, if any, can be made.

The Scottish Government’s economic analysis shows that a 50 per cent reduction in northern shelf cod quota could result in an estimated reduction in landed value to Scottish fishers of between £19 million and £21.5 million. Included in that analysis are 303 Scottish vessels, of which 35 saw northern shelf cod worth an average of 25 per cent of their total landed value per vessel. If historical fishing patterns continue, it is estimated that 40 per cent of those vessels are expected not to make a profit next year.

Northern shelf cod is also an important species for the onshore sector; it makes up more than 5 per cent of the total landed value for Kinlochbervie, Peterhead, Scrabster and Shetland. Advocating for an alternative to the headline advice that should still deliver an improvement in biomass and a sufficient quota for the North Sea and west of Scotland is a sensible and precautionary approach; it is one of our top priorities.

For our pelagic sector and, in particular, the mackerel fishery, my officials are exploring a significant package of measures that, again, focus on delivering a positive impact on stock biomass as well as on real progress towards a more comprehensive sharing agreement between partners, which has, sadly, been lacking and, inevitably, has been a contributing factor to the headline advice. Now is the time to make real progress on mackerel shares and to stop the unilateral actions and subsequent overfishing.

Regardless of any actions that we can successfully deliver, we will still be in unprecedented territory for setting a TAC for 2026 that is well below anything that we have seen on advice sheets since at least 1987. The impact will be felt across the sector, but by none more than our onshore processors. Between 2020 and 2023, mackerel accounted for around one third of the total tonnage and one quarter of the total landed value that was landed into Scotland by the Scottish fleet. In 2023, the four major mackerel processing businesses in Scotland employed more than 300 people in production and operations alone. Many pelagic processing jobs could be at risk and impacts could be felt throughout the sector if appropriate action is not taken. It is for that reason that I am urgently looking at what, if any, other measures I can take as cabinet secretary to support the onshore processing sector.

These are significant challenges for our pelagic and demersal sector, but, with the enormously constructive input from fishing representatives and my committed team of negotiators—