Chamber and committees

Last week, Elspeth Macdonald, of the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation, told us:

“I am not aware of any beneficial scientific impacts being generated by the data that has been requested from the part of the fleet that already has the system.”—[Official Report, Rural Affairs and Islands Committee, 24 April 2024; c 11]

What scientific benefits do you hope to gain from mandating REM systems?

Okay, so it is more of a wish list rather than the data being used as a reason to bring in those new asks and the SSI.

Last week, there was a lot of discussion about how this needs to be more carrot than stick. I asked whether it was about compliance rather than science, and you said that the data would be “helpful”—that was your word—to the Scottish Government. However, if there are no specifics about what Marine Scotland needs to be looking at in terms of discards or non-target species, how will it be able to do anything with the data or know whether it has the capacity to do anything with it? It would be pointless if the data was gathered and Marine Scotland did not have the capacity and resources to do anything with it. Its budget was cut by £6.9 million. Do you think that Marine Scotland has the ability to scrutinise the data?

I am sorry to push this, but what are you doing with that data right now if you are not confident in it?

You have sample data on lengths and weights that is provided voluntarily. Do you not do anything with it?

Okay, so what have you learned from that data that has given you no confidence that the sampling is good enough?

My question is about something that Ian Gatt said in his consultation submission. He said that pelagic boats already have cameras installed. How would the people who already have those cameras installed meet the guidelines that the Government is setting? Would it be like for like?

But what is the point? It is not your fault, but what is the point of having the trials if they are setting that precedent in delivering REM across the fleets when what RSPB Scotland wants is to look at that outcome? The trials have not even proven that that can happen without citizen science on board.

Elspeth Macdonald indicated that trials have been carried out with REM in place to work out whether the outcomes that the Government wants from it will be achieved. What is the point in carrying out a trial when we cannot prove that those outcomes will be achieved? I do not get it, but that might be my personal opinion.

Can Ian Gatt comment on whether he believes that there is a level playing field?

On a practical point, how does the marine directorate ensure that there is compliance among non-Scottish vessels out at sea?