Chamber and committees

In response to those comments, I fundamentally disagree with some of the misrepresentations of the regulations that have been made today.

My final point is that we have very clearly set out the rationale for these regulations, why we need them and how we could use them in the future. I ask the committee not to jeopardise the potential for Scotland to be world leading in our fisheries management and the potential uses of REM in the future. Again, I urge the committee to support the SSI.

Well, we have set out penalties in relation to the regulations. I might ask Jane MacPherson for a bit more information on that point, but I want to point out that all the data that is collected from REM has to be uploaded. We have set that out in the regulations. We have also set out the timescales for which that data must be kept, for how long we have access to it and what we do with the data from that point on, as well as how we could potentially use it in relation to any suspected activity. Do you want to add anything to that, Jane?

The key thing about REM is that it is an important tool for compliance and enforcement. It is really important that we have that element. I have a huge respect for our industry and the really good job that it does to provide us with a low carbon source of protein. However, there are instances of activity that we need to tackle and get to grips with and, ultimately, the roll-out of REM will help to achieve that.

In the past few weeks, our aerial surveillance caught an incident of quite a large quantity of dead pelagic fish on the surface of the water. If we were hoping to catch the people who could be responsible for that, we would be dependent on catching them in the act, which, as I am sure you can imagine, is incredibly difficult given the sheer size of the marine area that we have to cover with our compliance monitoring, whether that is vessel monitoring or aerial surveillance. REM will be a game changer in that respect, as I said in my opening remarks, as it will allow us to tackle the activity where we have seen it take place. It is very important in that regard.

In my opening comments, I touched on just how important REM is for the reputation of our seafood as a whole and what that means for retailers. We had responses to our consultation on the VMS from the Marine Stewardship Council and responses to the consultation on REM from the likes of Marks and Spencer, and all of them have said that it needs to be rolled out across the whole fleet because it enhances our reputation for sustainable fisheries and gives us the ability to show that process. They think that it can give us a market advantage, too—indeed, it has spin-off benefits.

The science element—the evidence that we can gather from the data that we are collecting—is also important. As the regulations bed in, we can start to develop and use the picture of all the information that we are receiving from that data to underpin the science that we use for fisheries management. What we can look to gain from that is quite exciting.

Jane MacPherson highlighted the process that would be gone through. Would you like her to repeat that?

I will bring in Ellen Huis on that point.

We are happy to talk more about some of the engagement that has taken place, if you would like to hear about that.

The regulations that we have brought forward have been largely based on the experience that we have had so far. The vast majority of the scallop dredge fleet has REM systems on board. We do not anticipate too many issues in that regard, but that is exactly why we have regulations that set out, for example, what happens if there is a first breakdown and should that happen again.

The 28-day grace period that you mentioned is important. You are absolutely right that we received a variety of different views on that. Some people think that the period is too long, but we think that the approach is a realistic and balanced one that could allow any necessary work to take place. Again, that is based on the experience that we have had so far. I believe that we have reached the right balance in the regulations.

I think that Ellen Huis wants to add a point to that.

Again, that is in relation to the data transmission requirements. I will pass over to Jane MacPherson, who can provide more information on that point.

They are handled slightly differently, because the technology that they have on board is different. That is why the scallop vessels have a 28-day grace period. They do not have satellite technology on board; often, they are more reliant on a mobile phone signal or wi-fi to transmit the data. That is why their data is stored on the REM device and uploaded only at the next available opportunity. However, we have not seen any particular issue in relation to that. The two segments are different—they operate in different ways—which is why we have that difference in approach.

We are going down a lot of hypotheticals. Again, all of this is about getting the balance right so that we do not undermine the objectives we are trying to achieve with the SSI. It is also about ensuring that we have the ability to deal with any problems that arise, which is why the regulations that Jane MacPherson set out and talked through, and the way that they are structured, are so important.