Seòmar agus comataidhean

Individually, fish farms must be able to operate within environmental limits, otherwise licences would not be granted. I again come back to the important pieces of work that have been undertaken since the previous committee’s inquiry. We have talked about the overall finfish framework that SEPA introduced in 2019 and its implementation. There is also the further roll-out of the sea lice framework, which will take place over a period of time.

Between those exercises, we can identify the areas where there are challenges. That comes back to the work that Jill Barber touched on earlier, and which the committee may touch on later in its questions about the consenting task group and the work that it is taking forward. Ultimately, we are looking to guide development to the right places. That is what we are trying to achieve through those frameworks and through this work. Some of that work is at the initial stages, but that is the general direction.

Yes.

First, I challenge the point about overall progress on recommendations. As I have outlined, a significant amount of work has been done across a number of areas to address some of the recommendations, and some of that work is on-going.

On the committee’s recommendation 3, which was on the call for a moratorium, I hope that the committee would not agree to that if the issue came up again today. Throughout the various sessions that the committee has had, we have outlined the complexities that exist around the issues of mortalities. The situation has not been helped by the data issues that we have talked about, such as how the data is recorded, how it is expressed and the reasons for which it is collected by different organisations. The data is transparent and out there, but we have to recognise that what is important is what is causing the mortality and that we are taking action to address it.

If there was a moratorium on new businesses, we would be penalising the industry. Some issues are beyond its control. All the work that we are undertaking through the sea lice risk assessment framework and the new framework that SEPA has introduced is about guiding the development to the right places. That work has been really positive and is achieving that aim.

Ultimately, given all the environmental concerns, if a fish farming business wants to get started, it has to go through the process and show that there will not be an environmental impact. All the work that is done on modelling and all the advances that have been made on that are critical. I believe that we have the right regulations in place for the industry to deal with challenges where they exist, but it is important to recognise the sheer volume of work that is going on and the work that the industry is doing to invest in all the key issues to try to address them.

I believe that the data that we hold is robust. In his previous evidence to the committee, Charles Allan outlined the various reasons for the level of no counts, but if it looked as if it were going to be an on-going or persistent issue, I would of course see what more could be done. However, I believe that we are in receipt of the data that we need.

I do not know whether officials have further information on the science that has been used on that. What is important is the control of medicines and any chemicals that are put into the environment. As Jill Barber discussed earlier, all of that is considered at the start of a process to ensure that any chemicals or medicines are used within environmental limits.

The Veterinary Medicines Directorate publishes the levels of antibiotics use, and there has been a significant fall—more than 50 per cent between 2020 and 2021—in their use, which is not widespread across the industry. Antibiotics were used in just over 8 per cent of marine sites. All of that information is published.

I do not know whether there is any further information that my officials would like to add.

Yes—sorry.

First, it is important to ensure that we do not conflate different issues. As I noted earlier, there is a difference in a situation in which you are dealing with mortalities that are because of a disease on that site, a listed disease or issues that involve environmental concerns that you cannot predict.

Jill Barber wants to come in.

As I said, in relation to the overall provisions and legislation that we have set out, I believe that we have the right powers in place to deal with any issues. If the committee has any particular recommendations in that regard, I am happy to hear them. Of course, we are always open to considering where any potential enhancements to animal welfare can be made, but it is not our intention to take forward work on that at the moment.

I mentioned some of the UK animal welfare committee’s recommendations on that, and we are actively considering those at the moment. Overall, I believe that the legislation and policies that we have in place allow us to deal with that.

I point to a response that was given earlier in the evidence session. You just heard at length about the work that is being undertaken through the consenting task group. It is important to point out that that could be a future iteration of that work. How we take that forward could relate to moving sites or something else. That would still have to go through the application process, but that could be part of a future iteration of that work.

The overall theme, which I hope that I have been able to express today, is that, ultimately, we want the right development in the right place. The frameworks that are being developed are aiming towards ensuring that we have that. That will continue to be a work in progress.

Yes.