Chamber and committees

What is the process that allows your members to have a sufficient say in any consenting process?

I want to go back to the collaboration and engagement between the two sectors. I am interested in whether the current interactions group has improved on or is doing anything different from what the previous group did. When you looked at how you would take forward actions, did you commit to doing anything specific that had not been done before? Has the relationship improved or declined since the announcement to double salmon farm production by 2030?

We, as a committee, did not have anything to do with the previous salmon interactions working group, and obviously you took on the leadership of a new working group. I was just wondering why a new interactions working group was set up. Had you picked up from the previous group anything that needed to be improved with regard to engagement and collaboration, or did you just start with a clean slate?

Thank you.

I will dig a bit deeper into the REC Committee’s recommendation that

“urgent and meaningful action needs to be taken to address regulatory deficiencies as well as fish health and environmental issues before the industry can expand.”

The industry has clearly expanded dramatically. Mortality rates are high. Could you flesh out and put some numbers behind the mention in your introductory statement that you are going to increase the number of sea bed surveys? The figures that we have had are that, out of 210 farms, SEPA submitted 72 sea bed survey results. Could you put some figures behind the number of inspections out of the total number, rather than the number that you have done?

I am quoting directly from the record of that meeting, which says that

“out of 210 farms, SEPA has 72 submitted sea bed survey results”.—[Official Report, Rural Affairs and Islands Committee, 5 June 2024; c 16.]

That figure does not represent 60 per cent.

I am trying to understand this, because I found it very difficult to extrapolate data from your website. Have the environmental issues that were addressed by the REC Committee been improved, or is it still too early for SEPA to monitor those improvements?

My understanding is that SEPA does not have a duty to implement improvement and that you, as an organisation, do not have any penalties if you do not discharge your functions. Is that correct?

My second question is, have you issued any orders to withdraw or varied authorisation in relation to the sites that you have inspected for compliance?

Sorry, convener.

Finally, where do I find that information?