Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee

Meeting date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019

Official Report 500KB pdf

---

Subordinate Legislation

---

Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c) (Miscellaneous Amendments) (Scotland) Regulations 2019 [Draft]

Welcome to the 25th meeting in 2019 of the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee. Before we move to our first item of business, I remind everyone to switch off their mobile phones, or put them on silent, as they may affect the broadcasting system.

Agenda item 1 is to take evidence on the draft Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c) (Miscellaneous Amendments) (Scotland) Regulations 2019. I am delighted to welcome Mairi Gougeon, who is the Minister for Rural Affairs and the Natural Environment. She is joined by Hugh Dignon, who is the head of the Scottish wildlife and biodiversity unit at the Scottish Government.

I understand that the minister wants to take us through the statutory instrument that is before us.

Yes. Are you happy for me to make a short statement?

You can make a statement, and then we will ask you questions.

That is fine. The Government is fully committed to protecting Scotland’s natural environment. There are many non-native species in Scotland, most of which are of little or no concern. For example, many agricultural crops and common garden plants are not native to Scotland and they contribute positively to our economy and our wellbeing. Species are classified as invasive when they cause harm, whether that is environmental or economic, or harm to our health.

Invasive non-native species were identified as the second biggest threat to biodiversity in the global assessment by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. They are a particular threat on islands, which can have sensitive and distinct ecosystems that are vulnerable to such changes. Invasives can have a wide range of negative impacts on native species, including the transmission of disease, predation and competition for territory and food resources. They can also lead to increased flood risk, infrastructure damage and human health risks. They are estimated to cost Scotland about £250 million a year. None of us can be in any doubt that we need to do all that we can to address the issue.

This instrument will ensure that we are aligned with the European Union and working to prevent invasive species from becoming established in Scotland and across the EU. On 1 April 2019, through two negative statutory instruments, we partially implemented the EU regulation on the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species. The instrument that is before the committee completes the implementation of that EU regulation. Specifically, the instrument will ensure that penalties are in place for infringement of the prohibitions on the keeping and sale of 13 species of European Union concern. It also creates penalties for infringing other restrictions on breeding, transporting and using invasive alien species in a variety of ways. It includes transitional arrangements of the statutory defence for owners of companion animals and commercial stock. Finally, it sets out arrangements for licensing certain restricted activities, for example, allowing existing owners to keep companion animals for the rest of the animal’s natural life.

That lays out what we are looking to do, and I am happy to take questions.

In effect, the instrument will fill a gap that might be left after an EU exit, in terms of the regulations that are already in place. Is that right?

The instrument is on the back of an EU directive from 2015. The two negative instruments that we introduced earlier this year dealt with part of that. There was other work and other priorities, and we are introducing the rest of the regulations today. This instrument will fulfil our obligation to implement the directive. Regardless of Brexit, this is something that we still need to do. [Interruption.]

Does Mr Dignon want to come in?

No, he is just reminding me that the 2015 legislation that I have just referred to is an EU regulation rather than a EU directive.

The instrument’s policy objectives and the minister’s opening remarks refer to companion animals.

I want to be clear about the fact that, as I understand it, some companion animals are invasive species—I am here to be corrected if I am wrong in saying that. I come back to the illegal and certainly unauthorised release of beavers on Tayside. I am uncertain as to whether they were companion animals, but they were not commercial stock. Does the order change the rules on matters of that kind? I can see that Hugh Dignon is frowning, so I might not be explaining this as clearly as I ought to be. That might simply be because I do not understand exactly the effect on companion animals or animals held by private individuals. Perhaps further information on that will help me and others.

Raccoon dogs would be an example of this. Somebody could be keeping a raccoon dog, which is considered to be an invasive non-native species. The regulations allow for the owner of that animal to keep it for the rest of its natural life. After that, the owner would not be able to keep any more raccoon dogs.

Is your question about how people would keep that animal?

I am having difficulty formulating the question, to be blunt about it.

To pick up on raccoon dogs, does the regulation prevent their owners from breeding further generations of them? Does it allow the animal, as you suggest, simply to go to the end of its natural life? What is the effect of the regulations on companion animals? I am a bit uncertain about it, but somebody who owns raccoon dogs might be clear about it. I do not and I am not. I am still uncertain what my question is, far less what the answer is.

Is the question whether, if you breed a non-native species, you contravene the regulations?

The regulations tie all those points together. People would no longer be able to keep raccoon dogs once their raccoon dog had reached the end of its life. There are also restrictions to prevent people from breeding that animal or selling it on. Combined with the instruments that were laid earlier in the year, these regulations bring all that together to put those further restrictions in place. I hope that that answers your question.

Does the instrument keep pace with the EU regulations that it replaces? What added burden will there be on landowners, for example, to control invasive species? Does the instrument introduce any additional burdens?

On the first part of your question, we have been looking to do this for a while and we have been in constant dialogue with other devolved Administrations about implementing it. Scotland will be the first part of the UK to implement the regulations, and other countries within Great Britain are also looking to do it. This all feeds into our invasive non-native species strategies.

The regulations are also part of the overall EU 2020 biodiversity strategies and they tie things together to make sure that we are all heading in the same direction and implementing the same measures to prevent invasive non-native species within the UK and across the EU.

What was the second part of your question?

I just wanted you to clarify whether the instrument will keep us in line with other European countries or whether it goes beyond that?

It would keep us in line with what is happening across the rest of the EU. Did you also have a question about any extra burden?

Yes.

We do not believe that there would be an extra burden. Does Hugh Dignon have any further information on that?

There is no specific extra burden on landowners, whom Mr Carson mentioned. It is worth noting that the instrument places some additional requirements on people who are in the horticultural trade, such as garden centre owners, pet shop owners and people who may be selling species to be used for research or medicinal purposes. If the species are on the list of those of European concern, that places restrictions on what people can do with them.

To what extent are the species on that list already in circulation in Scotland?

If you do not have a copy of the list, we will be happy to give you that information. Some of the species on the list are not relevant to us in Scotland because they would not be able to exist here. I cannot remember how many are on the list altogether, but I have it here. I will send it out to the committee with the further information.

We do not have a copy of the list; that would be helpful.

Just to be clear, the instrument is about restrictions on sale, breeding and management. What happens if a landowner has, say, giant hogweed on their land and is not controlling it? They are not spreading it, but not doing anything to prevent it from spreading. Does it cover that?

That is not part of this legislation. That is covered under existing Scots law—the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981—under which, as you know, it is an offence to release any such species or to allow it to spread. There are provisions in the 1981 act to make species control agreements with landowners for them voluntarily to remove the invasive species, or to impose a species control order if it is necessary to compulsorily require someone to remove a species. There is no general duty on landowners to remove species from their land. That would be a pretty onerous requirement, given the extent of invasive species such as rhododendron and Himalayan balsam throughout Scotland. However, where species pose a particular threat, we can take an approach that leads through a species control agreement and moves on to a species control order to work with the landowner to get the species removed.

Have any species control orders been issued in relation to giant hogweed, as an example, which is a public health problem in some areas?

I would not like to say for certain. I will need to get back to you to confirm that.

I would like to know the numbers.

Can the regulations easily be changed if a non-invasive species becomes invasive in Scotland? What happens at that point? There is the list of 49 species and the list of 13 in Scotland. What happens with the regulations if another species becomes a problem in Scotland?

I will ask Hugh Dignon to answer that.

Under the instruments that were introduced earlier in the year, we added species of EU concern to the lists of species on which there are direct restrictions on keeping, selling and so on. However, the 13 species in this instrument are not capable of being invasive in Scotland and, therefore, we could not control them under the 1981 act; we had to do it under this secondary legislation. If those species became invasive, we could address them under the 1981 act. I guess that we could change the underlying legislation from the EU regulations to the 1981 act. That would have limited impacts in real-world terms, but it would change the basis on which the legislation was banning or controlling the keeping, selling, transporting and so on of the species.

Do you foresee any problems in the short or medium term? It is probably not going to happen, but you could make the consideration that you have just described.

It could happen. Presumably, if climate change continues on the expected trajectories, species that cannot currently establish in Scotland might be able to establish in Scotland. We might then need to decide whether it was worth bringing them within the ambit of the 1981 act, rather than dealing with them under the legislation that we are discussing. However, it would not make a lot of difference in practice: an offence under these draft regulations would continue to be an offence under the 1981 act; it would just be that the legislation that controlled it would be different.

09:45  

We will come to a question from Fin Carson shortly. I understand from reading our papers that the Scottish Government is working in parallel with the other devolved Administrations in doing exactly the same thing. Am I correct?

Yes.

You may have answered this question already, in response to Mark Ruskell. Will the new regulations change any other Government policies or priorities when it comes to controlling giant hogweed, for instance? There is a competitive system, if you like, for getting funding to control it. In my opinion, that does not work particularly well. We can spend two or three years controlling giant hogweed, but if we do not get funding for the next year, it all comes back. Will the draft regulations in any way affect the Scottish Government’s policies and priorities for controlling the likes of giant hogweed?

That will always be a massive priority for us, given the challenges that we face with biodiversity. It will continue to be a priority for us in tackling invasive non-native species. In my opening remarks I outlined the impact that the problem is estimated to have, with about £250 million a year of expenditure involved. Tackling that problem must remain a priority for us, regardless of the draft regulations.

So, the regulations will not take future policy in a different direction.

No. Even when we leave the EU, we would still wish to do what we can to tackle all the invasive non-native species. That would absolutely remain a priority for us.

It is welcome to hear from the minister that the matter is a priority, but I understand that the specific funding for tackling giant hogweed that comes from the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage has, in effect, been pulled. That is a big issue for river trusts that are trying to tackle the problem on a co-ordinated catchment basis. I would appreciate your thoughts on how we ensure that the matter is indeed a priority, as the money does not seem to be there.

I echo what I said to Finlay Carson. Considering the wider impact, the fact that we are facing a climate emergency, the report on the threats to biodiversity, the fact that there will be a lot happening next year in Scotland in relation to biodiversity and the hosting of the conference of the parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in Glasgow, the matter must remain a focus for us. We must constantly look at how to tackle such issues.

Under the second item on our agenda, I invite the minister to move motion S5M-18216.

Motion moved,

That the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee recommends that the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) (Miscellaneous Amendments) (Scotland) Regulations 2019 [draft] be approved.—[Mairi Gougeon]

Motion agreed to.

09:48 Meeting suspended.  

09:49 On resuming—