Seòmar agus comataidhean

We will now continue with our questions on the back of the aquaculture report, turning to data accessibility and transparency.

Recommendation 11 of the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee’s report considered it essential that work on mortality reporting ensures

“high levels of transparency that will provide confidence to all stakeholders”,

and it recommended that the information

“provide an accurate, detailed and timely reflection of mortality levels including their underlying causes across the whole sector.”

That is something that we have spent time discussing.

Given that, as everybody appreciates, it is important to accurately report mortality, why has the Scottish Government not introduced a mandatory system for the reporting of mortalities, relying instead on the industry reporting them on a voluntary basis?

We will be coming onto that and will explore those issues under other themes.

Yes.

I have a couple of questions about the capacity of local authorities. A lot of weight is put on them when it comes not only to planning but to enforcement. Earlier, we touched on animal welfare cases. Before we move to questions from Edward Mountain, will you clarify local authorities’ role in referring welfare cases for prosecution? Given all their obligations, do you have confidence that our local authorities have the resources to do what is necessary?

I understand how critical those numbers are, but it is difficult to get the figures right now, because we know that they are sometimes reported in different ways, whether that is based on biomass, individual fish or percentages. Given the questions that Edward Mountain has asked, could we have some clear indicators or comparisons from 2018 up to date for the committee to look over?

We have a final question on this theme before we move to the next theme. Ariane Burgess, could you ask your supplementary question and then kick off on the environmental impacts theme, please?

Are you satisfied that the industry is currently working within those requirements, which, in your view, allow further expansion? How do you assess the industry as a whole? Once again, as I said, your vision was for the industry to be able to expand. How do you use those indicators to ensure that it is expanding and able to meet its obligations?

Are you comfortable that the industry can expand with the environmental and animal health standards that it currently operates under?

I have one last question. There were 65 recommendations in 2018 and concerns were raised about the industry at that time, which led to the use of the now well-used phrase:

“the ‘status quo’ ... is not acceptable.”

Do you believe that sufficient progress has been made to address the status quo from 2018, which was not acceptable?

I have a final supplementary in this area from Ariane Burgess.