Chamber and committees

We move on to theme 4, which is environmental impacts.

Having timescales and so on would be helpful.

Before we move to a question from Ariane Burgess, I remind everyone that some of our questions will almost certainly have been answered already. We should be conscious not to repeat the responses that we have had.

I think that that is because of the reporting period. I think that the answer that we got was that the fish health inspectorate did not report the full week.

Thank you for that. This committee is absolutely committed to ensuring that we hear voices from every aspect—for and against the salmon industry.

As part of the work that we are doing, we will produce a report in which we carefully consider all the evidence—positive and negative—that we have heard, and we will form our decisions at that point.

We have had an intense session that has run over time, but I hope that the witnesses will appreciate how important it was to respond to challenges in the media, and I thank them for attending.

The committee had originally planned to conclude its evidence taking at next week’s meeting by hearing from the Scottish Government, but, unfortunately, due to member availability, we are not able to do so. We have decided to reschedule that evidence session to a future date, which will be confirmed in due course.

Christine Grahame has a supplementary.

Constance Pattillo indicated that she wanted to come in, but I am happy for Ben Hadfield to respond.

Ariane, we are very tight for time, and you have moved significantly away from the purpose of this meeting.

Do you wish to declare any interests, Mr McArthur?

We move on to the next section, on which Rachael Hamilton has a series of questions.