Hansard

I am delighted to open the debate on invasive non-native species and to commend "The Invasive Non-Native Species Framework Strategy for Great Britain". Before we begin this debate, it is important that we understand invasive non-native species and their impacts. They are animals and plants that have arrived with the assistance of man and which cause damage to our environment, our economy, our health and the way we live.

There are about 1,000 non-native species in Scotland. Most of them are currently benign, but a minority cause serious problems. People tend to be aware of the big-problem species, such as the grey squirrel, Japanese knotweed and American signal crayfish. Unfortunately, those might be the ones that are difficult to eradicate completely. However, it is important that we take whatever steps we can to manage them. More important, we need to raise awareness about the issue, so that we can prevent future problems.

I emphasise the threat that invasive non-native species pose to biodiversity here in Scotland and around the globe. The International Union for Conservation of Nature describes their impacts as

"immense, insidious, and usually irreversible."

In Scotland, some of our most iconic species and habitats are threatened, and the impacts of invasive non-native species on Scottish biodiversity are already far-reaching. They can pass on diseases that are fatal to our native species, they predate on native species, they dilute our native gene pools and they compete for natural resources, such as light, food and water.

Action on invasive non-native species contributes to the achievement of the Scottish Government's greener Scotland objective, as well as having clear links to the Scottish Government's purpose of sustainable economic growth. People might be shocked to learn that it is estimated that invasive non-native species not only damage our natural heritage but cost the Scottish economy at least £200 million a year. The cost might even be much more than that; work is taking place to ascertain the economic cost. If we cast an eye south of the border, the impact can be illustrated by the Olympics site in London, where the cost of eradicating Japanese knotweed alone is estimated to be anywhere between £20 million and £70 million.

The importance of the rural economy to Scotland means that impacts of non-native species on agriculture, forestry and aquaculture can be significant. The Colorado beetle, which would pose a serious risk to our potato crops were it to become established, is one such threat. There are also new concerns, such as the citrus longhorn beetle, which threatens horticulture and forestry. Invasive non-native species can also impact on tourism and land development and exacerbate flooding.

The impacts of introduced species on health should not be forgotten. They include diseases that are carried by non-native species as well as direct impacts, such as the severe burns that are caused by giant hogweed. Invasive non-native species have the potential to affect us all and the way we live: they can reduce our enjoyment of recreational activities such as angling, hiking and gardening, they are a drain on our economies and they can reduce the quality of our lives and threaten our environment. Those issues are important to the people of Scotland and to this Parliament.

As we have gained a better understanding of the problems that are caused by invasive non-native species, the need for a co-ordinated and coherent framework for action has become apparent. The Scottish Government was therefore a key partner in the development of the framework strategy. The strategy provides a clear role for those who are involved in tackling this complex issue, and it ensures co-ordination of policy and action. It has the important and admirable vision that biodiversity, quality of life and economic interests will, when it is fully implemented, be better protected from the adverse impacts of invasive non-native species.

The strategy has three main goals: first, to achieve widespread awareness and understanding of invasive non-native species; secondly, to achieve a stronger sense of shared responsibility across government, key stakeholder organisations, land managers and the general public; and, thirdly, to provide a guiding framework for national, regional and local initiatives. It presents a hierarchy of responses: first, prevention; secondly, detection; and, thirdly, eradication and control. The strategy focuses on the preventive approach, which has the most likelihood of success. It is the least environmentally damaging and the most cost-effective method.

Once a species has become established, full-scale eradication is possible in only a minority of cases, so we must be pragmatic. Some of the invasive non-native species that are with us today are most likely here to stay because they may be impossible or prohibitively expensive to eradicate. For example, in 2003, it was estimated that control of Japanese knotweed across Scotland, England and Wales would cost £1.56 billion.

We can help to prevent introductions in the first place by raising awareness of the risks and the impacts of invasive non-native species. That takes me to another major section of the strategy, on building awareness and understanding. An approach that ignores greater public awareness will not succeed in the long term, so we firmly believe that greater awareness of invasive non-native species is the best defence against future threats. Evidence suggests that, once people understand the issues, they will do what they can to ensure that they become part of the solution rather than part of the problem. That is why we continue to work across the United Kingdom with the other Administrations to monitor the progress of that important work.

An informed public can also assist in detection and monitoring of non-native species, which takes me to my next point and to another key area of the strategy: early detection, monitoring and rapid response. The sooner such species are detected, the sooner action can be taken to reduce any threat. When eradication is possible, we must ensure that any action that is undertaken is cost-effective, proportionate to the threat, as humane as possible and has a minimal impact on native species. We must acknowledge that where species are a threat to Scotland's native species, habitats and economy, they may need to be controlled.