Official Report 704KB pdf
Official Controls (Transitional Staging Period) (Miscellaneous Amendments) (Scotland) (No 3) Regulations 2021 (SSI 2021/493)
Our second item of business is consideration of the proposed parliamentary procedure for a Scottish statutory instrument. I refer members to paper 3.
As the regulations were made under the European Union (Withdrawal Act) 2018, we first need to consider whether the parliamentary procedure that has been designated to the instrument by the Scottish Government is appropriate. Members will note that the negative procedure was designated, and that the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee agreed with that designation when it considered the matter on 18 January.
Are members content that the negative procedure is appropriate for the SSI? I ask members who are participating remotely to type an N in the chat box if they do not agree; otherwise, I will presume that members are content. There has been no comment, so we are content.
Red Rocks and Longay Urgent Marine Conservation (No 2) Order 2021 (SSI 2021/463)
Conservation of Salmon (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2021 (SSI 2021/466)
Official Controls (Transitional Staging Period) (Miscellaneous Amendments) (Scotland) (No 3) Regulations 2021 (SSI 2021/493)
Our third item of business is the consideration of three negative instruments. I refer members to paper 4. No motions to annul the instruments have been lodged.
I propose to write to the Scottish Government in relation to the Official Controls (Transitional Staging Period) (Miscellaneous Amendments) (Scotland) (No 3) Regulations 2021 for further explanation regarding why the transitional staging period ends on 30 June and when further stages are planned beyond that, and for further information on whether there are any practical differences in the import controls in Scotland compared with those of the rest of the UK as a consequence of the introduction of a Scottish instrument.
I propose asking the Scottish Government to confirm whether the issue falls within the food and feed safety and hygiene common framework and, if so, what the Scottish ministers’ views are on how well the framework is functioning, given the issues that are detailed in the Scottish Government’s letter.
Are members happy for me to write with those questions? Do they have any other comments to make?
Are you referring to the Red Rocks and Longay Urgent Marine Conservation (No 2) Order 2021?
That is one of the SSIs that we are considering.
I want to draw the committee’s attention to this. Marine Scotland held stakeholder engagement in 2021 on the proposal to expand the original marine protected area. However, I could not find any details of that when I went to look last night, so I want to get clarification from the clerks that that is correct and find out why that information is not available.
We can certainly ask the clerks about that. My understanding is that it is an emergency SSI to extend the MPA and that the extension of the whole MPA will be considered in March. I am being told by the clerks that that is correct.
If that information is not available—I could not find it—will it become available before March?
Another SSI will be laid that will include the extension that we are dealing with today.
I want to raise a couple of issues and ask whether they could be included in the letter to the Scottish Government.
I understand that it was scallop divers who identified the site originally, which would have been verified later on. However, following that, diving, reel fishing and trawling are all included in the ban from the area. It would be good to get a bit of information on the evidence base for that. I understand that it is based on NatureScot’s advice, which stated that flapper skate eggs are sensitive to a number of activities. The list of activities mentions diver egg collection but it does not mention diving for scallops. I am concerned that there is a difference in sensitivity with regard to different activities but that they have all been categorised in the same way.
I understand that the committee in the previous parliamentary session—the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee—wrote to the minister in March last year, when the first instrument on the extension of the MPA at the site was laid. The letter in response from the minister said that part of the process to consider the need for permanent protection at the site would involve a socioeconomic assessment and public consultation, which do not seem to be happening until later on this year.
I know that it is emergency legislation, but it has been almost a year since the first instrument was passed. There is a question about why more has not been done to gather the necessary evidence in the interim period.
12:15
I share your concerns about the lack of socioeconomic impact assessment, given that the first order has been in place for 12 months and there has been a commitment to a public consultation on making it a permanent MPA. I agree that we should write to the Government, asking about its interventions to look at the potential economic impact on the fishing industry.
In that letter, I want to include questions on the potential for people reporting, for example, flapper skate egg locations to be reluctant to report such important findings in the future if they are tied up in the ban. It would be good to know what work is being done around that to ensure that we continue to identify important MPAs—areas that should be protected—and that there is no reduction in their identification because of the impact on the people who identify them.
Are members content for me to write to the Government with those questions? Are there any other comments? There are no comments.
Are members content to note the instruments? I ask members who are participating remotely to type an N in the chat box if they do not agree; otherwise, I will presume that members are content. There are no comments, so we are content.
That concludes our business in public.
12:16 Meeting continued in private until 12:21.