Seòmar agus comataidhean

Salmon Scotland has lodged a service complaint to SEPA about the timeframes for dealing with licensing applications. Obviously, they were expected sooner. Has the issue been resolved, or is it on-going?

I have a supplementary question to Ben Hadfield’s response. I understand that companies are investing in housing and infrastructure, which is welcome. My one concern is that, in the past, we have had issues with tied housing in rural areas. I would worry if our only solution to accommodation was tied housing, because, as David Brown said, we want to bring people into the community and we want them to live there. We want local people to be able to stay, but if the housing is tied to the job they cannot then move around as they would naturally within a community.

Fisheries Management Scotland told the committee that it continues to receive reports about escaped juveniles from freshwater farms appearing in rivers, yet no escapes have been reported to the fish health inspectorate. Can you explain that discrepancy, and what action the industry is taking to prevent such escapes?

Okay, but the farm did not know that the fish had escaped. It did not report an escape.

I have one further question. Do you expect the processing site to reopen? I have visited it and have seen the skills of the workforce there. The staff will have moved on and, I hope, found other jobs. How do you protect a workforce with that level of skill and rebuild it after closure?

Perhaps we could write to you about that. I am sorry for putting you on the spot but it was worth asking the question while you were here.

I have been listening to the responses, which make it clear that freshwater treatments have been beneficial, but I am picking up a wee bit of reluctance. I understand that fish handling is an issue, but I am hearing concern that possible future regulation might make that a requirement, rather than something to be done when the need arises.

Thank you.

The real concern is about the timeframe. In the farming community, there are already concerns about the length of time that it is taking to produce the rural support plan and all the bits that are attached to it.

The timeframe in the regulations creates a fear that we could still be on 2018 funding for LFASS in 2030, because, if we pass this legislation, there is nothing that the committee or the Parliament can do to change it or to force the Government to change it. That funding rate could just go on, and that is not acceptable. That is what we are trying to say loud and clear. You can give us assurances, but you cannot set it in stone that that will not happen.

My concern in relation to an island impact assessment is that I believe that the regulations could have an impact.

The minister will be well aware that people have been talking for a long time about micro-abattoirs and the benefits—both animal welfare and economic—there would be if island communities, and smaller communities away from markets, were able to have abattoirs. They would be able to sell their own meat locally, the tourism industry would benefit, because there would be local produce available, and people could sell online. It would make for a huge economic boost.

Anything that adds to not only the cost but the bureaucracy of the process pushes all those things further and further away, and my concern is that the regulations might do that. They might just add another hurdle to get over. I am not suggesting for one moment that we are making great progress with having abattoirs—in fact, some that we have are already under threat—but the regulations could, first of all, dispense with those that are there and, secondly, stop us from getting others.