Seòmar agus comataidhean

I believe that it may well fall inside the remit of the Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee, but it is ultimately up to the Parliamentary Bureau to determine committee allocation of bills and pieces of legislation.

Absolutely. Where local management is in place—there have been a couple of pilots—it seems to be operating really well, so we would welcome proposals from the regional inshore fisheries groups on how it can be done in other areas. Local management and ownership will be really important in making progress, and it will be a critical part of our work as we move forward.

As I said, I met the regional inshore fisheries groups earlier this week. We talked about future engagement. We want them to continue the work that they are doing and we know that they will need support with that. We will continue to consider those issues. We want to ensure that the groups have the resources that they need to enable them to deal with issues such as future local management plans and to undertake the engagement that will have to happen. We will continue discussing that with them.

I am not able to tell you that off the top of my head, but I am happy to come back to the committee with that information.

I completely understand that. The member and the committee will be aware of the co-operation agreement with the Scottish Green Party, which sets out a number of measures that we are looking at with regard to inshore fisheries and putting a cap on activity. It also sets out our intention to introduce highly protected marine areas, which would cover about 10 per cent of our seas. We will, of course, follow due process in relation to introducing such measures, and we will consult and engage with communities and the fisheries sector.

I also highlight “Scotland’s Fisheries Management Strategy 2020-2030”, which was published towards the tail end of last year. We will publish an action plan on that to be delivered towards the end of this year.

In my role, I undertake a lot of engagement with the various regional inshore fisheries groups; indeed, I met the chairs of the groups earlier in the week. We will continue to engage with the sector.

As Alasdair Allan will be aware, there are many competing interests in our marine environment, including renewable energy and various fishing interests, and we also have to try to improve that environment, protect our fish stocks and improve marine biodiversity. There will be a lot of challenges over the next few years, so we need engagement and consultation to ensure that we fully understand all the issues and that we work with communities in developing our future proposals.

Absolutely. On your first question, which was about the co-operation agreement with the Greens, engagement with different stakeholders is a critical part of my job and something that I have sought to do since I was appointed. Since we announced the co-operation agreement, I have sought to meet fisheries stakeholders to discuss concerns and potential issues.

However, the fact remains that we want sustainable development across our fisheries sector. I understand that there are concerns. As we move through the agreement that we have reached and the policies that we have outlined, it is really important to engage and consult and to base our decisions on the best available evidence. Working with stakeholders and carrying out that engagement is a critical part of the process.

There are a lot of issues in the marine environment. I have spoken about the increasingly cluttered landscape when it comes to our seas, about competing interests between fisheries and renewable energy, and about trying to protect our marine environment in the best possible way. I assure the committee that we will engage in the proper process as we develop the policies that we have set out in the co-operation agreement.

You also asked about catching policy. We have, in the programme for government, set out in some detail how we intend to move forward on that and on other work on fisheries. However, as you said, the pandemic has had an impact on the seafood industry and, in particular, on the fisheries industry. That has shown how much we need to boost the resilience of the industry overall, and to strengthen the links between the catching sector and onshore interests—for example, through diversification of fishing opportunities and attracting new entrants.

We want to tackle some of the known issues, an example of which is the landing obligation. We will introduce a future catching policy to take a tailored approach to tackling discards and reducing unwanted catch through various technical and spatial measures. We intend to consult on that before the end of the year and to introduce legislation next year. As I said in my previous response, we will also publish a delivery plan that will set out our plans for delivering the future fisheries management strategy and the 12 points within it, which will address a lot of the issues that are being experienced. That has strong backing from all our stakeholders and will be a critical piece of work.

It is also important to note that the co-operation agreement will build on what is set out in the future fisheries management strategy.

Yes, and I am happy to give the committee a bit of background information on where the commitment came from. We had an independent review of the field services that are delivered by the Animal and Plant Health Agency. That was commissioned by ministers a couple of years ago to ensure that they continue to offer value for money and to see whether any other models could deliver efficiencies or improve effectiveness. The report was published early last year and it contained 10 recommendations including the creation of a stand-alone Scottish animal health and welfare delivery body, which would, it was felt, best meet Scotland’s long-term interests.

We recently asked Professor Milne, who undertook that work, to revisit the report—to look at the manifesto commitment and update his report to take account of the changes that have taken place since then. Obviously, we have had the impact of EU exit, the new animal health regulations and Covid-19. We expect to get the report back in October.

We expect that a new Scottish veterinary service will at least be established within the current session of Parliament, subject to ensuring that we get the parliamentary time to deliver it. It is estimated that the initial work to create it will take about 18 months. There is a lot of information that we have to scope out as part of that process. We will consider what the most effective model will be and how we are going to deliver it. As I said, we hope that we will be able to undertake that work within the current session, securing the parliamentary time to deliver a veterinary service that works and delivers for Scotland.

We have done work through the farmer-led groups, which have provided a suite of recommendations, and we made a manifesto commitment that we would deliver on those. Earlier in the summer—not long after I was appointed to my role—I met the chairs of the farmer-led groups, who were all enthusiastic about getting to work and were keen for the recommendations to be delivered and to play their part in reducing emissions in Scotland.

There will be huge challenges—there is no getting around that—and I do not think that anybody would underplay them. However, we can be world leaders in Scotland when it comes to sustainable agriculture. We want to work alongside industry, farmers and land managers to deliver that. It will, of course, be for the board to test and develop detailed proposals to see what will work most effectively.

As I said in a previous answer, we committed in our manifesto to shifting half of our current funding for farming and crofting to conditional support by 2025. Although I cannot say what the specific measures will look like, because they are still to be co-developed, a key part of that will be ensuring that every farm business reduces its emissions to the lowest possible level and does what it can to restore and protect biodiversity across its business. Supporting biodiversity and reducing emissions will be key components of that.

I am happy to address those points, as I have done a couple of times during portfolio question time and during debate last week. That notion of culling livestock was nonsense last week, so it is nonsense this week. It is not being considered.

On the policies that are being developed, I do not think that it is fair for me to prejudge the work of the implementation oversight board. As I said at the start of my evidence, its first meeting will be on Monday, and that will be for the board to discuss and decide on.

You are right to say that COP26 is not far away. We want the group to be ambitious and, as I said, to get to work and start delivering on emissions reductions. I know that everybody on the board is keen to progress that work. That is why the board is meeting fortnightly. It will keep the impetus and drive going so that we can develop a package of funded measures in time for COP26.

The board was set up to drive forward the recommendations of the farmer-led groups. However, alongside that we have had various reports in the interim, such as the report by Farming for 1.5°. We have to consider the climate change plan update as well as various other reports that have been produced. Again, I cannot just cherry pick off the top of my head and without discussing with the board the things that we can implement straight away. It will be for the board to discuss and consider wider recommendations, and to see what work can be progressed—and progressed quickly.