Seòmar agus comataidhean

Cabinet secretary, you pointed to a couple of learning projects in Mull and the Western Isles. I know that the marine directorate is very busy with lots of things, and it is challenging for the committee to understand all the work and all the bits of the puzzle. We come across little bits of it when we consider an SSI or when a piece of work comes to the committee. In order for us to contribute well to the scrutiny of your work, it would be good to understand some of the elements that you are working on that contribute to the fuller picture. I would appreciate some more information on those initiatives and on what you are seeking to get from them.

The Sustainable Inshore Fisheries Trust, otherwise known as SIFT, in its response to the 2024-25 spawning closure consultation, said:

“There is a measurable economic cost of prohibiting creeling within the closed area, without a concomitantly measurable benefit to the resident cod stocks.”

That is based on evidence that it has. If including creeling in the closure makes very little difference to cod stocks, why not allow creeling to support the economic benefit while focusing management measures where they will make a big difference, such as minimising bycatch from nephrops trawling?

I am grateful that the cabinet secretary is here today to clarify points around the SSI, but can she tell us what it means when it refers to “a board”? The term is not used in the 2022 act, and my understanding is that the role of the chair and the set of commissioners will be more than the standard role that a board plays. I would appreciate clarification in that respect, because, as you will know, we discussed the point at length during the passage of the good food nation legislation.

The point of the Scottish food commission is to provide board expertise and understanding of all aspects of the food system to ensure that good food nation plans and other policies bring about the fundamental changes that we need. In what situation would the Scottish Government appoint a member of the food commission who is not

“representative of ... the food business sector or ... third sector bodies”

or does not possess

“expertise in or experience of”

the list of “food-related issues”?

I would appreciate knowing about that work.

I want to pick up on Allan Gibb’s anecdotal mention of a creel fisherman in the area. You said that 4,000 to 5,000 creels are being deployed—I do not know what the right word is—or dropped every day, or frequently. I would appreciate some evidence on that. I remember that, when you were here last year or the year before, you mentioned such staggering numbers. Other people have said to me that that would be impossible unless it is a cumulative figure. I would like you to give the committee some evidence on that.

I am also interested in what the Government is doing to look into the issue. As I understand it, there are creelers who work on the west coast—although not necessarily in the Clyde—who are calling for a cap or limit on what they can deploy, and I think that we need to take that on board. It is very reasonable to request that there be a cap so that there is enough to share between everybody; meanwhile, we would get proper recovery of stocks and so on.

What are we doing here? We are trying to ensure that there will be fisheries in Scotland 30 or 100 years from now and that we will be able to continue to say that fishing is part of our culture. I would like to get a bit more information from the Scottish Government marine directorate on the evidence on the number of creels that are being deployed in the Clyde cod box area and a bit more on what work is being done to look into the cap that creelers are calling for.

As I said, the science says that the SSI is necessary but not sufficient to protect and restore cod stocks. Rhoda Grant raised a serious point about the impact on creelers’ and divers’ livelihoods. A 2015 document from Marine Scotland showed that trawling affects the sea bed more than 18,000 times as much as creeling does. I reiterate my request for assurances from the Scottish Government that it will share with the committee the PhD work that the marine directorate and Professor Mike Heath at Strathclyde university are supervising, after the cabinet secretary has sought advice, so that we can see the recommendations for recovery.

I ask for a commitment to use the latest science, including the PhD work, when there is a replacement for the Clyde closures SSI in 2026 and beyond. I also request that the Scottish Government begin scoping additional measures, especially bycatch reduction, in order to protect the stock, because the latest science says that that is the main pressure.

I want to clarify a point about the Clyde cod stock being separate from the other west of Scotland cod stock. That is about not genetics but the potential to manage our Clyde cod stock separately. The Clyde cod stock sits completely within the Scottish Government’s purview, so we could absolutely bring in measures to minimise bycatch from trawling. I am glad to hear about the work that is being done on that, but I urge that that be accelerated, given the state of Clyde cod and our at-risk seabirds.

Item 2 is a round-table evidence-taking session on the “Housing to 2040” strategy. We are joined by Chris Birt, associate director for Scotland of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation; Dr Caroline Brown, director for Scotland, Ireland and English regions at the Royal Town Planning Institute; Stephen Connor, development manager at the Tenants Information Service; Emma Jackson, social justice strategic lead at Citizens Advice Scotland; Eilidh Keay, who represents Living Rent; Professor Ken Gibb, director of the UK Collaborative Centre for Housing Evidence, based at the University of Glasgow; Gordon MacRae, assistant director for communications and advocacy at Shelter Scotland; David Melhuish, directorof the Scottish Property Federation; Ronnie Macrae, chief executive officer of the Communites Housing Trust; Rhiannon Sims, senior policy officer at Crisis; and Chris Stewart, president of the Royal Incorporation of Architects in Scotland.

I warmly welcome our witnesses to the meeting. To begin our conversation, I invite everyone to briefly introduce themselves. I am the convener of the committee and an MSP for the Highlands and Islands.

That was very constructive and helpful.

Thanks.

I just want to sort out a couple of things, process-wise. We might have started to touch on some questions that colleagues want to ask, so I am going to bring in Marie McNair. However, I already have a stack of people who want to come in—and I have just realised that Caroline Brown has not yet had a chance to speak. It would be great to hear from her from the planning side on this topic of the balance between short and long-term approaches, so I will bring her in now and then bring in Marie McNair. I will then go to David Melhuish, Chris Birt and Emma Jackson.

I am just trying to keep the conversation going. It is a bit like lasagne; every so often, I will add in another question, and witnesses can choose to pick up on that or go back to something else that they want to get on the record.

Thanks very much. It is always very helpful when somebody comes in with an idea—something that can bring about a chain of moves.

I have to ask you to wind up, please.