Chamber and committees

Thank you. This is probably a good time to have a 10-minute comfort break.

Might that be a role for the regional inshore fisheries groups? I know that they will undertake a review in the future. There is a different model south of the border where those groups are well funded, but it is a completely different picture up here. Do you see a role for the regional inshore fisheries groups in doing some of that work or collaboration?

I thank you all very much. You are all most welcome to the committee—thank you for taking the time to come along.

We will cover a number of themes in our evidence session. We will kick off with the marine directorate budget overview. How have events such as European Union exit, the Covid-19 pandemic and climate and biodiversity change increased or changed the pressure on the marine directorate’s budget and resources? What should be the directorate’s key priorities in 2025-26 and beyond?

In addition, given that the budgets were increased as part of EU exit, can you say whether those budget increases actually managed to deal with the new challenges of managing fisheries post Brexit, and whether the CFP policies have indeed been successfully delivered?

We will kick off with Elaine Whyte.

I am aware that others want to come in, but I will keep things moving, given the time. I am sure that you will have the chance to put your points on record when we explore some of the other themes. We will now look specifically at marine science.

That suggests a complete lack of sufficient transparency in some of the policy decisions that the marine directorate has put to the Scottish Government. Indeed, we have seen that with the lobster and crab management measures, which have already been mentioned. A policy was brought in, it was challenged by fishermen, and there was a bit of political pressure. All of that has resulted in a one-year trial, and fishermen are now biting the hand off the marine directorate to get the equipment that will allow them to gather the evidence to support their argument. That has been seen as fantastic evidence of a good relationship between fishermen and the marine directorate, but it has happened as a result of a lack of transparency and proper engagement with the fishing industry in the first instance. Therefore, the main issue here is transparency.

Emma Roddick has a supplementary question, and then I will come back to Emma Harper.

I will ask Alastair Hamilton to come in at this point, because he will probably be able to answer the questions that have been asked.

That is an interesting point.

That might be one for Alastair Hamilton and then Michel Kaiser.

Does a cost benefit analysis need to be done on whether the compliance and enforcement function is effective and delivers what it says on the tin? There is little point in the police trying to enforce a 30mph limit in some parts of Dumfries and Galloway where there are no cars on the road and there is no benefit to it because there is no evidence of accidents. That is an analogy. If there is to be a cost benefit analysis, who should carry it out?