Seòmar agus comataidhean

I go back to my question about your possibly demonstrating a similar example somewhere else in Scotland, such as the Moray firth. What impact has there been in terms of the different topography?

We need to take displacement very seriously. Off the Wash, it has been demonstrated that the topography has displaced smaller fishermen, who have had to go further out to protect their livelihoods. There could be arguments on both sides.

Your argument is that we should have a transition—we will discuss that later in the questioning—and that we almost have to make a sacrifice. Is that what you are saying? That argument does not stand up, does it? In relation to the example of Norway and the Norwegian fleets, the restrictions are put in place not for conservation reasons but to restrict gear conflicts.

The petitioner gave compelling evidence and answered our questions well, but the scope of the petition requires a multi-approach strategy. The Government needs to ensure that it is working on the issues that the petitioner raised, where there is a glaring deficit in meeting targets. For example, he said that, without a comprehensive inshore management plan, we are blind and that the Government should be responsible for ensuring that we look at the financial impact of what the petition suggests. The Government can do a lot more. I recommend that the petition be closed at this point.

How is your organisation funded?

Are those 200 active fisher people?

I have one more small question. I am not sure whether other members will mention this, but we have spatial squeeze right now. The renewable offshore energy sector is presenting challenges for the future of fishing. Do you have concerns about spatial squeeze on top of the restrictions that you want to bring in through your petition?

I will take you back to the closure of the Clyde cod box. Members of the party that is in government now called for fishermen to be compensated after the new measures were introduced to protect cod stocks in the Firth of Clyde. You talked about decommissioning and a just transition. Would you support compensation for individuals who have been displaced?

Do you have examples of where restrictions exist on fishing similar to those proposed in the petition and where topography makes it harder for smaller fishing boats to adapt to being displaced further afield? What do you believe might be the impact of the 3-mile limit?

I am just wondering what you would say to the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation, which argues that the 3-mile limit is a “protectionist” approach that benefits

“only one type of fishing”.

Okay. I want to go back to some of the points that you made about the socioeconomic benefits that the measures in the petition could bring. Do you believe that the price of nephrops would increase, pricing us out of the domestic market and leading to the replacement of our domestic market by foreign imports?