Chamber and committees

There are concerns, though, that native breeds and the like have a longer gestation period, and that the regulation could work against them. Waiting to see whether small farmers who are breeding cattle go out of business to determine whether the scheme is working is counterproductive because, once those animals are gone, they are gone, and we would be looking to force farmers to slaughter cattle way before they should be. While the cattle are alive, they are a carbon sink.

I have one point of clarification. Is it the case that, if we do not agree to the instrument today, the scheme will continue but without the new conditions being applied?

We spoke earlier about microjellyfish and the like. When we visited fish farms, we spoke about what actions are taken to avoid microjellyfish. Would it be possible to have the ability to move fish farm cages? When microjellyfish in the area were coming towards a fish farm, would it be possible to move that fish farm? Given that planning consent and where to put the fish farms is so complex, could there be the ability to move them in an emergency? We have heard about fish being moved but, if the farm could be moved, that might be less traumatic for the fish.

On that theme, we are aware that jobs are hard to find in rural areas, and that the jobs provided by fish farms can have an economic benefit in allowing people to remain in rural areas. What consideration is given to that when looking at planning consents for fish farms?

The discussion is quite interesting—nobody knew that the situation with microjellyfish was going to happen, and that had an absolutely devastating impact on fish farming. It was equivalent to foot-and-mouth disease, but people may not understand that. With foot-and-mouth, people saw at first hand what was going on, but they did not see the devastation from the microjellyfish and the impact that that had on those working in fish farms, or indeed the on-going impact that it is having on folk down the line in the processing industry, who have lost their jobs.

We have talked a bit about what the industry can do in looking at where the next threats are coming from. I wonder what the Government is doing to support industry in that, and what Government foresees as being the issues, because we need to be ready for those. There was understanding of the microjellyfish issue within a year, and of how to farm around it, and there are perhaps other things that we could do to mitigate the impact even further. However, what are the new threats, and what action are we taking to avoid them?

As a response to the Griggs review and concerns from the industry, the Scottish Government set up the consenting task group. What progress has it made in streamlining the consenting process?

When will that happen? It sounds almost like a rolling programme with no real timeframe.

That sounds like it is adding more complexity rather than streamlining, to be fair.

You say that you are evaluating the process. How are you evaluating it? What does success look like? What are your timescales? If it is a success—if you have achieved what you were looking to achieve—when will the process be rolled out?

Thanks.