Hansard

It is fair to say that the bill was introduced after a lot of good work had already been done to bring together the different interests of fish farming, shellfish farming and angling. The bill will provide powers to support the aquaculture industry and to ensure continued confidence in its products by giving statutory underpinning to the codes of good practice that have already been drawn up by the industry.

The two issues that are of paramount importance are the control of parasitic lice and the prevention of escapes. Although there is no conclusive evidence that either of those have caused the decline in wild salmon stocks, it is accepted that they may have made a bad situation worse either because passing wild fish have been infected with lice that developed in fish farms or because the genetic stock has been weakened due to wild fish interbreeding with escapees.

The parasite that is defined in the bill is the sea louse, but it is possible to widen the definition, if necessary, through statutory instrument. Argulus has been cited as a parasite that should perhaps be considered. The Scottish Executive has said that it is monitoring the situation with Argulus and will take action if it is deemed necessary.

There is provision in the bill to regulate the movement of farmed marine fish between specified sea areas, to maintain health and restrict movement of disease. There are powers to have inspectors assess the measures in place for controlling parasites and preventing escapes. Inspectors will have discretion to serve enforcement notices if such notices are deemed necessary.

There were some areas of concern around inspection—there are concerns about who the inspectors would be, what their qualifications would be and whether their actions would cut across the veterinary advice that fish farmers get from their own vets. Those issues were all raised in the discussions and the evidence sessions during our stage 1 consideration of the bill and I think that they have all been satisfactorily addressed. The bill offers an opportunity to rationalise the number of inspection regimes, which is generally to be welcomed. Inspection must be proportionate, although the committee sounded the cautionary note that inspections must still be effective.

There was a lot of discussion on whether there should be strict liability for escapes. Again, the issues were thrashed out in evidence and discussion and it was felt that the provisions would be adequate and effective.

Relocation of fish farms was a hot topic some time ago. There are issues to do with the historical difficulties that there have been with Crown Estate-approved sites that are left unused, but there has been a general welcome for the fact that that issue will be tackled. The new planning regime that is being brought in by the Planning etc (Scotland) Bill will also be helpful.

For salmon and freshwater fishing—both game and coarse fishing—the bill's provisions fall into three main categories: improving rules on access; welfare of fish, with the prohibition of certain gear that can be damaging; and conservation. There will be regulation, for example, of the introduction of live fish into inland waters and there will be contingency powers to control GS. The worst-case scenario for GS is very scary indeed and the best strategy would be to keep it out at almost all costs. There are practical difficulties in checking every port of entry to Scotland, but the committee felt that there might be mileage in having a requirement for people to declare whether they have been anywhere where they might have come into contact with GS and, if they have, whether they have treated their gear. We also felt that as much as possible should be done to raise awareness at points of entry, through fishing bodies and where permits for fishing are sold.

However, the biggest single danger seems to be the import of live fish. The committee had concerns about how good the information is about where GS is prevalent in other countries and other waters and about the opportunities that exist for banning the import of live fish. As far as incoming gear is concerned, we heard that people who have been engaged in water sports or angling in countries where there is GS could take simple precautions that work—either by freezing their gear or by soaking equipment in salt water.

There were concerns about the draconian nature of treatment and how effectively a whole river system could be treated. There are also complex issues to do with balancing priorities—whether we should sacrifice salmon for whisky or vice versa, for example. There was discussion about protection orders, and the feeling was that they could work well, and that, although they had been abused in some areas, they are reasonably fit for purpose. However, it was accepted that it was time to bring them up to date, and that was welcomed. There are some points to be tidied up, but the bill in general is widely supported and welcomed, and the general principles should be endorsed by the Parliament.