Chamber
Plenary, 26 Feb 2009
26 Feb 2009 · S3 · Plenary
Item of business
Marine Bill Consultation
Forgive me for misunderstanding Labour's amendment, but it seems to me that it expresses antipathy towards marine Scotland and making an early start on it. That is how I interpret the amendment, but I am sorry if I have misunderstood it.
It is essential that Scottish licensing is consistent with licensing in other parts of the UK and that a co-ordinated and coherent approach is developed. In particular, the proposals to license dredging are long overdue. I was surprised to learn that that activity is not regulated, given the devastating consequences of its misuse.
Turning to our marine ecosystems, we welcome the three-pillar approach to marine nature conservation, involving the contribution of wider sea measures, species conservation and site protection.
As well as protecting the very legitimate rights of commercial fishermen and ensuring the future of their livelihoods, we want more attention to be paid to the interests of recreational sea anglers.
Some of our seabird population, such as kittiwakes, Arctic skuas and Arctic terns, are under enormous threat, as my colleague Nanette Milne eloquently outlined yesterday in her members' business debate. We must use the bill in any way we can to do more to protect all threatened species. In that regard, I share Scottish Environment LINK's concern that the UK bill currently includes no provisions to improve species protection. That gap should be addressed in the UK legislation. In the Scottish bill, the adoption of marine ecosystem objectives and marine protected areas seems entirely reasonable, but that must be compatible with and not exclude economic development—in particular the economic development of fisheries—for the reasons that I outlined earlier.
Onshore, economic activities and growth can be achieved in conjunction with environmental enhancement in a sustainable way. We must try to reproduce that arrangement offshore, while accommodating all reasonable points of view. Marine Scotland will have a difficult role in striking a balance in its decisions on what economic activity is acceptable and what is required for marine nature conservation. However, the organisation's success or failure will, in large part, depend on the political and financial support that it receives and on the legislation that will be—and, indeed, has been—passed in this Parliament and elsewhere.
We welcome the progress that has been made so far in developing a Scottish marine bill. The evidence from the consultation suggests that there is not a moment to lose. The Scottish Conservatives believe that the sooner we get started the better.
I move amendment S3M-3528.1, to insert at end:
"and considers that the forthcoming marine legislation must fully take into account the interests of commercial fisheries and recreational sea anglers and could provide an appropriate vehicle for tackling the severe decline in breeding sea bird populations."
It is essential that Scottish licensing is consistent with licensing in other parts of the UK and that a co-ordinated and coherent approach is developed. In particular, the proposals to license dredging are long overdue. I was surprised to learn that that activity is not regulated, given the devastating consequences of its misuse.
Turning to our marine ecosystems, we welcome the three-pillar approach to marine nature conservation, involving the contribution of wider sea measures, species conservation and site protection.
As well as protecting the very legitimate rights of commercial fishermen and ensuring the future of their livelihoods, we want more attention to be paid to the interests of recreational sea anglers.
Some of our seabird population, such as kittiwakes, Arctic skuas and Arctic terns, are under enormous threat, as my colleague Nanette Milne eloquently outlined yesterday in her members' business debate. We must use the bill in any way we can to do more to protect all threatened species. In that regard, I share Scottish Environment LINK's concern that the UK bill currently includes no provisions to improve species protection. That gap should be addressed in the UK legislation. In the Scottish bill, the adoption of marine ecosystem objectives and marine protected areas seems entirely reasonable, but that must be compatible with and not exclude economic development—in particular the economic development of fisheries—for the reasons that I outlined earlier.
Onshore, economic activities and growth can be achieved in conjunction with environmental enhancement in a sustainable way. We must try to reproduce that arrangement offshore, while accommodating all reasonable points of view. Marine Scotland will have a difficult role in striking a balance in its decisions on what economic activity is acceptable and what is required for marine nature conservation. However, the organisation's success or failure will, in large part, depend on the political and financial support that it receives and on the legislation that will be—and, indeed, has been—passed in this Parliament and elsewhere.
We welcome the progress that has been made so far in developing a Scottish marine bill. The evidence from the consultation suggests that there is not a moment to lose. The Scottish Conservatives believe that the sooner we get started the better.
I move amendment S3M-3528.1, to insert at end:
"and considers that the forthcoming marine legislation must fully take into account the interests of commercial fisheries and recreational sea anglers and could provide an appropriate vehicle for tackling the severe decline in breeding sea bird populations."
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Trish Godman):
Lab
The next item of business is a debate on motion S3M-3528, in the name of Richard Lochhead, on the marine bill consultation.
The Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment (Richard Lochhead):
SNP
Scotland has a world-class marine environment and an enviable maritime heritage. We have 10 per cent of Europe's coastline, 20 per cent of Europe's seas and ...
Sarah Boyack (Edinburgh Central) (Lab):
Lab
Nowadays, we regularly have debates in the chamber in advance of a stage 1 debate. In some ways, that is good, because it lets us focus on issues for proper ...
Richard Lochhead:
SNP
I was intrigued by the Scottish Fishermen's Federation's submission. I assure the member that I spoke to the organisation yesterday to clarify its position. ...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
I have read the Scottish Fishermen's Federation's submission and the key points in it, and it does not seem to me that the cabinet secretary has dealt in det...
Richard Lochhead:
SNP
I simply ask the member to note the quote from RSPB Scotland that I read out in my opening speech. It is a major player in Scottish Environment LINK.
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
I was just coming to RSPB Scotland. The quote that I am going to use was also given in response to the consultation. Again, RSPB Scotland's points about the ...
Richard Lochhead:
SNP
Will the member give way?
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
No. I have taken a couple of responses from the cabinet secretary already.Marine Scotland's status is important. We are being denied the opportunity to debat...
John Scott (Ayr) (Con):
Con
I welcome the debate on the Scottish marine bill, which comes at an appropriate time, following the introduction of the UK Marine and Coastal Access Bill at ...
Elaine Murray (Dumfries) (Lab):
Lab
I clarify that we have no antipathy towards marine Scotland. Our query is whether it should be an arm of Government or should be independent of Government. T...
John Scott:
Con
Forgive me for misunderstanding Labour's amendment, but it seems to me that it expresses antipathy towards marine Scotland and making an early start on it. T...
Liam McArthur (Orkney) (LD):
LD
Like Sarah Boyack, I welcome Roseanna Cunningham to her new role, but I am disappointed that the Government's gain is the Rural Affairs and Environment Commi...
Richard Lochhead:
SNP
I welcome that final sentence of the member's comments, but let me pick up on what he said about the timescale for the bill. Does he not recall that his part...
Liam McArthur:
LD
The previous Administration had been in place for eight years when Mr Lochhead made his statement in June 2007—I am confused about the commitment that he gav...
Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green):
Green
My contribution will be short, but very sweet. My amendment is motivated by the growing perception that the present world crisis offers an opportunity for us...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Alasdair Morgan):
SNP
The debate is fully subscribed so I will stop members as soon as their time limit is reached.
Kenneth Gibson (Cunninghame North) (SNP):
SNP
Our coasts and seas provide food from fisheries, energy and mineral resources, routes and harbours for shipping, tourism and recreation opportunities and sit...
Peter Peacock (Highlands and Islands) (Lab):
Lab
I have spoken many times about the importance of the seas to our basic existence as human beings. Indeed, the seas provide the basis for life on our planet a...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
SNP
I am sorry, but the member's time is up.
John Farquhar Munro (Ross, Skye and Inverness West) (LD):
LD
I am pleased to be involved in this debate on the proposed marine bill. If the bill is eventually passed, it will impact on the lives and wellbeing of many o...
Alasdair Allan (Western Isles) (SNP):
SNP
It will come as little surprise to hear the member for the Western Isles speak in favour of a marine bill. The sea has represented life and, often, death for...
Rhoda Grant (Highlands and Islands) (Lab):
Lab
I join other members in wishing Roseanna Cunningham well in her new post. I agree with other speakers about the need for a robust and overarching marine poli...
Richard Lochhead:
SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Rhoda Grant:
Lab
Do I have time, Presiding Officer?
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
SNP
I suspect not.
Rhoda Grant:
Lab
Okay. I am sorry, Mr Lochhead.In the proposed bill, political ideology again comes ahead of the needs of the communities that we serve. The minister must cha...
Robin Harper:
Green
The debate has been interesting and I welcome much of what has been said. There is a growing consensus around the fact that, through a combination of no-take...
Rhoda Grant:
Lab
Robin Harper misses my point. The problem is that scientists are different from fishery protection. The scientists should have full and free access to fishin...
Robin Harper:
Green
I thank Rhoda Grant for that clarification. We certainly must have scientists working with the fishermen. I was glad to hear references to the science from t...