Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have a number of questions, one of which Karen Adam has just asked. I appreciate the cabinet secretary’s response.

This morning, we will consider a motion to annul the instrument. I would love to understand what the impact of that would be on the area in question.

Without that protection, what could we see happening in the area?

What would be the long-term impact of having no protection for the next two years? I know that that might be a hypothetical question, but I am concerned about the possibility of having no protection in place.

Thank you. I have a few other questions.

The evidence that we received last week from Mike Heath on the need to allow the stocks to recover and to mitigate unintended bycatch and discards was compelling. What will the cabinet secretary do to address those issues through the future catching policy?

It has been good to hear that there is great consideration of the collaboration that has been taking place and that will go forward, and a recognition that that needs to be underpinned in future activity.

Does the cabinet secretary consider that the RIFGs are suitably democratic? Why are community and environmental voices not present at their meetings? Where should those voices make their arguments, if not in the RIFGs?

How would our fishing sector be impacted if the instrument were annulled?

Thank you. The regional inshore fisheries groups are required to establish a management plan for the fisheries in their patch. Is the west coast and Clyde management plan sufficient to achieve a sustainable fishery? It seems not, given that the SSI that is being debated is not part of that plan. So, what else is needed?

From the evidence that I have heard today, I think that protecting future cod fisheries is paramount, and I agree with the precautionary approach, so I will not support the motion to annul. However, going forward, we must get all the voices in the room, which you have indicated that you are planning to do. Assessing the closure after this period of time is important. Something that has come to me very strongly in the course of these evidence sessions and other ones that we have been taking on the marine space is that there is a lack of resource for an increasing amount of responsibility for Marine Scotland.

That needs to be reviewed, and we need to have the right resource for data gathering and monitoring so that we understand the spatial issues, the spawning issues and whatever other issues we need to understand, so that we have fisheries for the future. What we are talking about here and what we are trying to do for the long term is ensure that people who need to fish to make a living have fish in 10, 20 or 100 years from now. The precautionary approach is the right approach, because we are looking for a long-term impact.

Thank you for that response and for your answer to Elena Whitham’s question, in which you painted a picture of everyone pulling together to try to find solutions. We are trying to find the chinks of light and rays of hope that have come out of the pandemic. People were pushed into a situation in which everyone had to play their part to find a solution that worked.

I thank all the witnesses for joining us this morning and for the evidence that they have given, which will be very useful in helping us to consider our next steps. I will suspend the meeting to allow for a changeover of witnesses.

I remind witnesses that if you want to come in and we have not directed a question to you, you should type R in the chat function.