The
Presiding Officer (Mr George Reid): The next
item of business is a debate on motion S2M-310, in the name of Allan Wilson,
on "A Strategic Framework for Scottish Aquaculture".
The Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural
Development (Allan Wilson): Today's debate
provides a welcome opportunity to re-emphasise the importance of aquaculture
to the Scottish economy and its contribution to improving the lives of
Scotland's people. I see that a number of members from the Parliament's
first session, in which we discussed such matters, are present and I welcome
new members of Parliament to the debate.
In "A Partnership for a Better Scotland", the Executive committed to
supporting an aquaculture industry that is sustainable, diverse and
competitive. The industry has grown steadily for about 25 years and today
provides more than 6,000 jobs throughout Scotland through its farming and
downstream activities. Those jobs are the life-blood of many of our
communities, especially in the Highlands and Islands, but also in many other
parts of Scotland, where trout farming, processing and smoking activities
take place. We cannot and should not forget the numerous essential service
providers throughout the country, which include the feed manufacturers, the
haulers, the net suppliers and the engineering and maintenance teams. The
industry sustains a tremendous amount of employment and economic activity
and is therefore important to the economy as a whole.
As we all know, the aquaculture industry has had, like any developing
industry, to face—and continues to face—many challenges. During recent
years, the structure of the industry has changed.
Our small to medium-sized businesses, which are so important to the industry
and the communities in which they are located—which are among the most
remote and fragile communities in the country—must operate effectively. Many
smaller businesses have given way to, or become part of, much larger
multinational companies, which have demonstrated enormous commitment to
investing in and developing aquaculture in Scotland.
Whether large or small, such businesses face the common challenge of
operating and succeeding in a highly competitive, international or global
marketplace. That is not easy. The Scottish industry must, in order to
compete effectively in such a highly competitive environment, take a number
of steps.
Fergus Ewing (Inverness East, Nairn and
Lochaber) (SNP): I am grateful to the minister
for giving way. We share his view that the Scottish industry should be
competitive. Does he agree that the imposition by the Crown Estate of about
£2 million per annum for rental of the seabed is an anti-competitive charge,
such as virtually no other competitor country faces?
Allan Wilson: As
the member knows, different producing countries face a variety of competing
pressures, regulations and charges. Our regulatory regime is on a par with
the regimes in those countries; indeed, regulation here is probably as
comprehensive as it is in any of those countries.
I am not convinced that simply bearing down on production costs, investing
in modern, efficient plant and equipment and having a highly trained and
motivated work force are sufficient.
The European salmon market is renowned for its volatility. If salmon prices
are badly hit, the trout market tends to suffer, too. Like many in the
chamber, I have been particularly concerned by the decline in salmon market
prices that has occurred over many months and which has had a negative and
adverse knock-on effect on company results.
My concerns took me to Brussels—it was actually during the election campaign
in April—for talks with the cabinet of Commissioner Lamy, who is the trade
commissioner. I argued that the Community should continue to maintain an
active role in the European salmon market, because there was otherwise a
real risk that the market might be pushed deeper into trouble. We did not
then, and I do not now, share the Community's optimism for an early upturn
in market fortunes.
George Lyon (Argyll and Bute) (LD):
The minister will be aware that, approximately two months ago, the Norwegian
fisheries minister announced that Norway's voluntary feed-quota regime,
which had been in place to restrict production in order to meet the
requirements of Europe's minimum import price scheme, was to be abandoned.
That is perhaps a sign of the competition that is to come. The grave worry
of the industry is that that could result in dumping back into the European
market, further depressing prices. I hope that the minister is aware of
that.
Allan Wilson: I
was going to come to that very point. I share George Lyon's concern; I was
about to say that it is my intention to raise with the Norwegians issues
about Norway's market changes and the direct impact that their approach to
the market has on our salmon farming industry. In addition, I hope that the
industry will maintain a dialogue with the other salmon-producing countries,
including Norway.
The Norwegian fisheries minister was in Scotland last November for what
proved to be very constructive discussions with ministers and
representatives of the industry. We agreed that, although we are in
competition, we should also co-operate wherever possible. As George Lyon
pointed out, Norway recently announced a number of changes to its control
regime, such as the winding up of
feed quotas from the end of 2004. Those are important issues that could have
a bearing on future market trends, so we should be clear about their likely
effects.
Despite the poor trading conditions, the Scottish industry enjoys certain
important advantages. Consumers associate Scottish aquaculture produce with
quality—correctly, I believe—and are currently prepared to pay a premium.
Scottish farming operations are also closer than their competitors to the
main markets, which are principally the European markets, which means that
the industry can supply a fresher product. What we need is a return to
market stability. In such circumstances the Scottish industry is well placed
to compete with its competitors, whether within or outside the European
Union.
The industry has had to face up to challenges of another kind. It is not
universally liked. Public disquiet about aquaculture has increased as the
industry has developed and expanded. Particular concern has been expressed
about the interactions between farmed and wild stocks. Other issues have
also been raised about the industry's operations and their impact on the
wider marine environment.
It was against that overall background that the Executive decided that the
issues surrounding aquaculture in Scotland should be closely examined. Then,
as now, the Executive was committed to sustainable development.
Mr Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and
Easter Ross) (LD) rose—
Allan Wilson: We
wished to ensure that an industry that is as important as is aquaculture to
the Scottish economy was placed on a sustainable footing, so that it could
realise its full potential in the future, gain greater public acceptability
and continue to contribute to the sustenance of the economies in the fragile
and remote areas such as those that Mr Stone represents.
Mr Stone: That is
very much the case, minister.
Does the minister agree that the industry has taken itself some distance
forward? In particular, one thinks of the fallowing regime that is being
introduced and that is widely recognised. We are beginning, possibly as a
result of that, to see the return of some wild salmon stocks to the west
coast of the Highlands.
Allan Wilson: I
agree. The industry has done that responsibly and voluntarily, as I said in
response to a question from one of Mr Stone's colleagues only last week. The
furtherance of the area management agreement process, in conjunction with
both industry and wild salmon interests ensures that a responsible approach
to synchronisation and fallowing is able to cut the sea lice problem that
can affect wild salmon. It is to the industry's credit that it has done
that.
I turn to focus on "A Strategic Framework for Scottish Aquaculture". We
always intended the process to be open, transparent and inclusive and I
believe that we succeeded in that. The task took longer than expected—some
15 to 16 months—and we were criticised for that by some, but I took the view
that it was better to take time and to do it correctly than it was to rush
the task and, perhaps, get it wrong.
We spent the first six months in bilateral discussions with a range of
public sector and private sector bodies, environmental non-governmental
organisations and other stakeholders. It was a listening exercise: I wanted
to hear first hand the views and concerns of the industry about aquaculture
and the issues that a strategic framework should tackle. We also invited a
range of other organisations to submit their views in writing, and many did.
That consultation exercise proved to be invaluable to the production of the
final document. We established a working group, the members of which were
drawn from a range of regulators and key stakeholders. The group met seven
times between June last year and February this year. Again, I take the
opportunity that is afforded by today's debate to thank those who took part
in an historic process, not least my colleague Maureen Macmillan, who
represented the committee with responsibility for the environment on the
working group.
The working group proved to be a vital stage in the development of the
strategic framework. As one would imagine, there were—because of the
different views that were represented on the group—lively exchanges;
however, our differences were invariably resolved or led to identification
of priorities for action, 33 of which are contained in the strategic
framework.
Although the working group's members regularly consulted their constituents
on the various emerging drafts of the framework, a full public consultation
was conducted during the six weeks between last Christmas and early
February. The final consultation attracted 134 responses, which were all
considered by the working group. It was therefore with a sense of
achievement that I was able on 24 March to launch "A Strategic Framework for
Scottish Aquaculture". It was an achievement because although it had been a
long time coming, it meant that we now had in place a long-overdue
framework. Those who helped to prepare it, and who were committed to it,
will share full responsibility with me for its future development.
If I may paraphrase Winston Churchill—
Alex Johnstone (North East Scotland) (Con):
Oh, here we go.
Allan Wilson: It
is only
"the end of the beginning",
but we are not going to
"fight them on the beaches".
Mr Johnstone is safe enough.
The framework contains a challenging agenda for the months and years
immediately ahead. There are 33 action points and the Executive has taken
responsibility for implementing 15 of them. A range of stakeholders will
lead on the others.
Some observers, one of whom is present in the chamber, have already accused
the Executive of a "lack of urgency" in implementing some of the more
important priorities. I reject that criticism; it is unfair and uncalled
for. It is barely six months since I launched the framework document. We
should remember that some of the issues are extremely complex. In that short
time, the various lead bodies with responsibility for implementing the
action plan have made excellent early progress. I will give some examples.
Four new working groups have been established and are already tackling
issues such as carrying capacity, which is vital to our understanding of our
marine environment; location and relocation issues involved with sea lice;
improvement of our waste infrastructure and development of the first ever
farmed-fish welfare code of practice. The Scottish aquaculture research
forum has had its inaugural meeting. The Executive has committed £100,000
per annum to the budget. Other
organisations have made varying and not inconsiderable financial commitments
to the research programme.
Rhona Brankin (Midlothian) (Lab):
Will the minister take an intervention?
Fergus Ewing rose—
Allan Wilson: We
have already heard an intervention from Fergus Ewing.
Rhona Brankin: The
minister mentioned a variety of different approaches that have to be taken
to improve the environment. Does the minister agree that bolstering consumer
confidence is essential to the development of Scotland as a country that
produces for the quality end of the market?
Allan Wilson: Yes;
ultimately the consumer will be the real regulator of the market. If we
cannot sell in Scotland or more widely to consumers in European and other
markets, the industry cannot succeed. Producing a quality product and
ensuring consumer confidence in that product are vital to the industry's
success.
Fergus Ewing:
Paragraph 3.4 of "A Framework for Scottish Aquaculture" states:
"the Crown Estate and the Scottish Executive will ... consider whether an
independent study should be commissioned to look at the costs which
regulation imposes on aquaculture businesses in Scotland".
Has the consideration period terminated? Has a decision been made? If so,
what is it?
Allan Wilson: I do
not know whether Fergus Ewing is trying to be facetious. That was an
important consideration that was entered into freely by the Executive, the
industry, the regulators and everybody who is involved in the industry, not
least the producers, because we want to compare regulatory costs in this
country with those of regulatory regimes elsewhere and to see what we can do
to slim the volume of regulation and to improve the industry's cost base and
competitiveness.
That is what the Executive, the industry, local authorities, regulators and
everybody who is involved in the process are doing. We urge the member to
join us in engaging positively in that process.
The Executive is monitoring the effectiveness of the various sea-lice
management initiatives, particularly those that are under the auspices of
the tripartite working group process. Steps to minimise the number of
escapes represent real action on the environmental front.
The industry is well advanced on the development of an exports action plan
and on plans for a healthy seafood eating campaign. Members might have seen
other Executive campaigns to encourage the eating of fish, because of the
health benefits of the omega oils that are found in salmonids and other oily
fish.
The industry is also well ahead with the development of the new codes of
practice, which cover issues such as fish health, best environmental
practice, containment on fish farms and health and safety. The industry is
consulting on its draft proposals.
With the help of trade associations and the enterprise network, Lantra—the
sector skills council—has produced an excellent overview of the labour and
skills position in the industry, and an action plan for tackling gaps and
weaknesses. If members have not seen that document, I commend it to them.
Only last week, in the latest financial instrument for fisheries guidance
round, the Executive awarded almost £1 million to aquaculture projects and,
as part of the programme's mid-term review, we are working closely with
partners and stakeholders to ensure that aquaculture derives maximum benefit
from the availability of the considerable sum of £1 million for development.
Work is taking place on extending local authority planning powers to marine
aquaculture. My officials have visited all relevant local councils for
initial discussions about the implementation process. The Parliament sought
to have that extended and we are acting on that. The Highlands and Islands
aquaculture forum has agreed to be the main stakeholder group that will help
the Executive
to prepare detailed proposals for subsequent public consultation. The first
meeting is scheduled for 2 October.
Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP):
I waited some time before intervening, because I hoped that the minister
might comment on the sustainability of food stocks for our growing
aquaculture industry. The Danes took 1.463 million tonnes of industrial
fisheries from the sea last year. For the benefit of our aquaculture
industry, it is important to develop a strategy. What progress is the
Executive making on ensuring sustainable food stocks, to which paragraph
3.60 of the framework refers?
The Presiding Officer:
The minister should start to wind up.
Allan Wilson: The
feedstuffs industry was an active participant in developing the framework,
and dialogue continues with Executive officials. In conjunction with the
Crown Estate, we are funding research into ensuring that the industry's
capacity does not exceed environmental limitations. Part of that work
involves developing alternatives to natural feedstuffs and finding out how
we can supplement the diet of farmed salmon to ensure that they continue to
generate the omega oils that make them a healthy foodstuff, while avoiding
an adverse impact on wild fish stocks. I say to Stewart Stevenson that that
work continues apace.
It is a bit early for specific conclusions and outcomes and, ipso facto, to
be criticised for not producing them. However, I trust that colleagues will
agree that what I have outlined in the 19 minutes or so of my speech is an
impressive start to implementing the framework's action plan.
There is certainly no lack of urgency on my part. I repeat that this is only
the beginning of the process. All of those who are involved in implementing
the priorities for action must keep up the momentum. There is a long way to
go.
When I close the debate, I will explain how the Executive intends to monitor
and report future progress and keep the framework alive and refreshed in
years to come. I am happy to listen to members' contributions and to respond
to points that they might raise during the course of the debate.
I move,
That the Parliament welcomes the Scottish Executive's commitment, as set out
in A Partnership for a Better Scotland, to support an aquaculture industry
that is sustainable, diverse and competitive; endorses A Strategic Framework
for Scottish Aquaculture, prepared in collaboration with, and supported by,
a wide range of stakeholders and launched in March 2003 and notes the
progress already achieved in addressing the priorities for action listed
therein, and further welcomes the Executive's continuing commitment to work
in partnership with industry and all the other key stakeholders in regularly
reviewing and reporting to the Parliament progress with the monitoring and
implementation of the full programme of work contained in the strategic
framework.
|
