Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have one final question. It goes back to the point that Rachael Hamilton raised about what would happen if we got a flare-up of infection and what the effects would be with regard to compensation and so on. Given the rigorous scrutiny and diligence of the farming community, how likely is a flare-up of TB in Scotland?

Thank you.

This is just a wee supplementary. You said that the Welsh CVO stated that their good areas are getting worse and their bad areas are getting better. Do they have movement restrictions between infected and uninfected areas?

I accept that mortality levels should be as low as possible. Although I hate to sound callous to people who view fish as sentient, surely, as part of the process, there is an opportunity to turn the by-product into fish fertiliser and other products. I see Edward Mountain shaking his head in disgust. We do not want mortality, but mortality is going to happen, because immortality is not an option. If you are going to have farmed animals, fish and livestock will die—that is just part of the process. That can be used in another way. Is that already happening in the industry?

As we go along, I want to learn more about the benefit that will come to the actual community who live there and who are most affected. Thank you.

In the Maggie Gill report, the second recommendation for the Scottish Government is:

“Aquaculture (as for land-based food production) is an industry that has environmental impacts and is susceptible to climate change. The Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) or another part of the SG should consider commissioning independent, horizon scanning syntheses of the international literature to give advanced warning of where regulations may need to change.”

You just started to talk about what the sea bed compliance has been. What general improvements have you seen? There was something about the non-compliance with aquaculture regulations and the difference that the 2019 revised aquaculture regulatory framework made.

Can I have one more question, convener?

I reiterate that aquaculture is a massive part of the economy and it is vital that we allow it to continue. My understanding—to be honest, it is quite limited—is that disparate bodies have different views on whether it is a good thing. It is important that we understand that it is really important to our economy and our rural jobs. We have to nurture it, but we must find the right way to do that.

I go back to what the convener said: if we are sitting in third place, we want to be first. The question is how we can get to first place by increasing the volume that we can produce in this country. That is probably more of a comment than a question.

It is effectively future proofing it.

I asked that question because there are concerns about the siting of new fish farms. Given that salmon is the biggest fresh food export from the UK bar none, that it accounts for about £362 million of gross value added to the Scottish economy alone and that it employs 2,391 people in the most rural and remote areas, it is a hugely valuable industry to us and we want to make sure that it can move forward and continue to thrive. What is the Scottish Government doing to address the concerns about the siting of new farms? Do we need a central scientific evidence base that is trusted by all in order to allow the siting of new farms?