Chamber and committees

This is a very interesting conversation. I remind myself that the SSI and REM sit under the United Kingdom Fisheries Act 2020, which calls on us to work with an ecosystems-based approach, and under the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010. In both cases, we are trying to ensure the long-term success of our fisheries. REM helps us to understand the full picture of the state of our fisheries and how to act appropriately, as and when is needed, in case we find ourselves on the edge of a fisheries collapse.

We have been talking about the data, and I come back to data now. Both the fishing industry and non-governmental organisations have pointed out that REM data could be useful for marine spatial planning and to mitigate the spatial squeeze. I remember the tremendous evening event that the SFF held in the garden lobby a while ago, which raised that issue. I would like to get your views on how REM data could be useful in those ways for marine spatial planning and mitigating against that spatial squeeze. We know that there will be an expansion of renewables, but there are also conservation objectives. I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on that, Elspeth—and then perhaps yours, Helen.

I will go back to what I was going to ask. In a way, Elspeth began to answer it, but I would like to go a bit further into use of data. Concern has been raised by stakeholders that the marine directorate may not have the capacity to use all the data. I am interested in understanding that.

I hear what you say about the need for confidentiality, data protection and that kind of thing, but there are examples globally of data sharing. Peru, in 2018, became the second country in the world to share all of its VMS tracking data on the Global Fishing Watch platform, so that anyone can view it. Twelve countries already have data-sharing agreements that allow transparency without breaching commercial confidentiality. There are various ways in which we could do that—for example, by lagging the data sharing by some months and not including individual identifying information. I know that a time lag might not work for an offshore wind company that is trying to get a permission or whatever, but it could work in other situations.

I am interested in hearing what you think about how we could share data so that we could move much more rapidly to understanding what is going on in our seas and get a much better picture.

Good morning, and welcome to the 12th meeting in 2024 of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee. I remind all members and witnesses to ensure that their devices are set to silent.

We have apologies from Gordon MacDonald. I welcome to the meeting Colin Beattie, who is attending as a Scottish National Party substitute member. Mark Griffin is unable to join us for the start of the meeting; he will join us as soon as he can.

Agenda item 1 is a decision on whether to take item 4 in private. Do members agree to do so?

Members indicated agreement.

Willie Coffey has a supplementary.

We do not have a crystal ball for these things, but perhaps we should keep an eye on that.

On that note of transformational change, I thank the witnesses for joining us this morning. The session has been very constructive and informative, which I really appreciate, and it has been great to have Jo Armstrong along for her first session with the committee. I look forward to seeing you in the future.

I will briefly suspend the meeting to allow for a changeover of witnesses.

The first group is on the cladding assurance register, additional work assessments and levels of risk. Amendment 10, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendments 44, 45, 11, 47, 48, 12, 49, 13 to 16, 56, 57, 18 to 20, 60, 61, 21, 22, 64, 25, 27 to 29, 31, 32, 69, 70, 73, 74, 37 to 40, 81, 41 and 43. I point out that, if amendment 10 is agreed to, I will not be able to call amendments 44 and 45, due to pre-emption.

The next group is entitled “Single-building assessments—content, definition, and effect”. Amendment 46, in the name of Mark Griffin, is grouped with amendments 51 to 53, 82 to 84, 42, 85 and 86. I call Mark Griffin to move amendment 46 and to speak to all the amendments in the group.

I invite Pam Duncan-Glancy to speak to amendment 51 and other amendments in the group.

The next group of amendments concerns liability for costs of assessment and remediation. Amendment 50, in the name of Miles Briggs, is grouped with amendments 54, 59 and 62.