Chamber and committees

Following consultation with interested organisations, the Board of the Food Standards Agency (FSA) approved at its meeting on 20 July the followingperformance targets for the Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) for 2000-01:1. Public Health Protectiona) Reduction of microbiological hazards in meat:Fully apply MHS Clean Livestock Policy.Not to apply the health mark stamp to any meat showing visible faecal or alimentary tract contents contamination.Take effective action in slaughterhouses with low Hygiene Assessment System (HAS) scores to improve hygiene standards.b) Removal of Specified Risk Material (SRM) from the human and animal food chain:Strictly enforce SRM controls in abattoirs.2. Animal WelfareStrictly enforce Welfare at Slaughter and Killing Regulations.3. Staff TrainingProvide update training for all Principal Official Veterinary Surgeons and lead Official Veterinary Surgeons (OVSs) in enforcement (training course to be developed in liaison with FSA Legal Services).Provide update training for 33% of lead OVSs in animal welfare at slaughter (training course to be developed in liaison with MAFF Animal Welfare Division).Provide refresher training for 33% of lead OVSs in hygiene requirements (training course to be developed in liaison with FSA Veterinary Public Health Unit).All training to be completed by 31 March 2001 and to comply with Investors in People standards.4. Customer FocusProvision of high quality serviceIntroduce an independent element to MHS Appeals System.Sign up to Government Enforcement Concordat.To meet the FSA targets for customer service.Maintain full compliance with Charter Mark standards.5. Value for MoneyEfficiencyTo implement those recommendations in the Pooley report applicable to the MHS and accepted by the FSA for implementation in 2000-01.To implement those recommendations in the external efficiency review accepted, and within the timetable laid down, by the FSA Board.6. Financial PerformanceTo operate within the cash allocations as agreed with the FSA.To recover from government departments, agencies and the IBEA the full economic costs (calculated in accordance with the relevant charging legislation and accruals accounting) of providing agreed services or other work undertaken on their behalf.A copy of the consultation package on the performance targets, summary of responses and details of the assessment of these targets are available on the FSA website at www.foodstandards.gov.uk.Until 31 March 2000 the MHS was an Executive Agency of MAFF. Accordingly the MAFF Minister has published the MHS annual report for 1999-2000 in which performance against last year's targets is reported. A copy of the report has been placed in SPICe.

The increases in Scotland's budget were calculated in line with the funding arrangements set out in the Statement for Funding Policy. A revised version of this was published by HM Treasury on 18 July 2000. A copy of the publication can be found on the HM Treasury Internet site at www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/pdf/2000/sfp4.pdf.

We shall shortly publish the National Cultural Strategy which will create a framework to ensure access to culture in all areas of Scotland.

The report on the proposed superquarry at Lingerbay raised a range of complex issues. My consideration of one issue in particular has been complicated by recent policy developments, in the light of which it has become necessary for me to seek further information before I can make a substantive decision on this planning application. I have come to the view that I cannot make a decision without clarifying the position, with the advice of Scottish Natural Heritage and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee, as to whether or not any part of the proposed development area should be proposed as a Special Area of Conservation under the EC Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC).

A planning application by Redland Aggregates Limited (now Redland Lafarge) was submitted to the then Western Isles Island Council on 25 March 1991. On 24 June 1993, the Islands Council informed the then Secretary of State that they were minded to grant planning permission and, on 6 January 1994, a Direction, calling in the application for the Secretary of State's determination, was issued. A public local inquiry was conducted by the former Chief Reporter between 11 October 1994 and 6 June 1995. The Reporter submitted her report and recommendations to the Secretary of State on 29 April 1999.

The report comprises four volumes totalling about 800 pages and is extremely complicated. It has therefore been necessary for my officials to consider it in some detail. They must ensure that, when I come to take a decision, I am properly informed on all the relevant matters. Only then can I reach a proper decision.

Planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Ministers are, therefore, required by law to consider the statutory development plan for an area and all material considerations. An important material consideration is the nature conservation interest in the site. In Part 1 of her report, the Reporter recognised that there were botanical interests of national and international importance on the site, but she was unclear on whether the site merited designation as a Special Area of Conservation (SAC).

The requirement to designate SACs derives from the EC Habitats Directive. This establishes a system for the selection of sites containing certain species and habitats. This involves national Governments proposing sites to the European Commission as candidate Special Areas of Conservation (cSACs).

Following the proposal of cSACs to the European Commission by Member States, the Commission conducts a "moderation process" to determine which sites are to be designated as SACs. The first stage of this process took place between September and November 1999. The Commission decided that, in common with other Member States, the UK had proposed an insufficient number and range of sites as cSACs. The UK was therefore invited to propose further cSACs. Moreover, the alleged insufficiency of the UK's list of cSACs has, since January 2000, been the subject of reference by the Commission to the European Court of Justice. The Commission intends to consider proposals for further sites at a second moderation seminar in early 2001. To meet its international obligations in relation to nature conservation, the UK Government therefore intends to propose additional cSACs.

In the light of the European Commission's judgement that the UK had proposed insufficient cSACs, I commissioned scientific advice from Scottish Natural Heritage and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee about what further sites should be selected. I published, on 14 June, a list of sites which had been recommended to me as cSACs (Official Report, 14 June 2000, S1W-7913). That list did not include any site within the Lingerbay application area.

There is, however, a question arising from evidence in the report of the public local inquiry, which has not been resolved by the advice referred to above, about whether part of the application area may merit selection as a SAC. The report indicates that the site at Lingerbay hosts several natural habitat types for which the EC Habitats Directive requires the selection of cSACs and for which the UK has been found by the Commission to have proposed too few sites. These include North Atlantic wet heaths (whose conservation interest is increased by the presence of internationally important bryophyte communities noted in the report), European dry heaths, Alpine and boreal heaths, siliceous Alpine and boreal grasslands, and blanket bog.

The evidence in the report raises the question of whether the area merits selection as a cSAC, but does not provide sufficient material which would allow me conclusively to reach a view on that without expert advice. As the nature conservation status of the site is a material consideration in determining the planning application, I need to be clear about that matter. To take a decision on the planning application, taking into account, among other factors, partial or out of date information on the site's status for nature conservation purposes would, I believe, be wrong. I am aware that further delay in reaching a substantive decision on this planning application will cause considerable disappointment among both proponents of the proposal and objectors.

A decision as to whether or not to propose an area as a cSAC must be properly informed. The Scottish Executive relies on Scottish Natural Heritage and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee for advice on nature conservation. I have therefore instructed SNH and JNCC to consider whether the site at Lingerbay should be proposed to the European Commission as a cSAC. I have asked SNH and JNCC to let me have their views as quickly as is consistent with the integrity of the detailed consideration they will now need to undertake.

I have asked my officials to write to the parties to the original inquiry to inform them that this is being done. We will also inform them when we receive the scientific advice which I am commissioning. One issue which may, of course, fall to be considered when we have this advice is whether or not the inquiry should be re-opened. That issue, and related issues about the remit of any such re-opened inquiry and how best to expedite its proceedings will, of course, have to be determined by reference to the advice received from SNH and JNCC and the circumstances obtaining at that time. However, should it prove necessary to re-open the inquiry we would take care to ensure that the remit of the re-opened inquiry is no wider than is necessary to enable me to reach a properly informed decision. There would be no question of simply rehearsing all of the matters which the Reporter has already carefully considered.

In view of the quasi-judicial function which I must exercise in reaching a final decision on this application, I cannot go further in this response lest this be interpreted as prejudicing my consideration of the case. I do, however, give a commitment that, subject to ensuring that I have all the necessary information, and that I in no way compromise the fundamental planning system principles of openness, fairness and impartiality, the determination of this application will be expedited as quickly as possible following receipt of the scientific advice I am commissioning.

The circumstances of this case are by any standards exceptional. However, I am determined to ensure that we learn from the process which has been followed on this application and that we adapt our procedures to reduce the possibility of substantial delays in the future

I am launching today, a Report by the Tripartite Working Group "Wild and Farmed Salmonids - Ensuring a Better Future" produced jointly by the Scottish Executive, representatives from the salmonid farming and wild salmonids fisheries.

The Report, incorporating a Concordat signed by all parties, addresses issues at the interface between wild salmonid and aquaculture interests and promotes a framework for solving local management problems at a local level. I very much welcome the Concordat and the endorsement it provides for issues to be addressed through local Area Management Agreements, two of which are already in place. This will require greater openness, development of trust and mutual support. I firmly believe that this is the best way forward for all concerned.

Copies of the Concordat and Report have been placed in SPICe.

Generally, investment in information and communication technology is a matter for the private sector in line with regulatory and commercial considerations. However, the Special Transitional Programme for the Highlands & Islands will include provision for limited support to ICT development, including infrastructure in remote areas, where the needs of the area cannot be met by commercial interests alone.

I attended the Fisheries Council meeting in Luxembourg on 16 June as part of the UK team.

The council covered a number of issues relevant to the Scottish fishing industry. On the agenda at the UK's request was an item about the haddock fishery to the west of Rockall. I raised this matter in the council and emphasised the risk to stocks as a result of the recent activities by Russian vessels in international waters. I also stressed the need to bring this fishery under proper regulation by the North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC). It was extremely encouraging to get strong support for this initiative from a number of other member states and a commitment from the Commission to raise this issue in NEAFC.

The council also discussed the Commission's report on fleet capacity (the Multi-Annual Guidance Programmes - MAGP). The UK team made it clear that the recommendations contained in the report were unacceptable and outlined, in particular, the need for activity controls to remain an option for managing the fishing effort of the Scottish pelagic fleet.

The council agreed new arrangements for the collection of biological and economic data. It also discussed reports about Regional Fisheries Organisations, the integration of environmental considerations into the Common Fisheries Policy, Regional Workshops, the EC's fisheries agreement with Morocco, the external aspects of the CFP, a review of the total allowable catch for anchovies and concerns about by-catch of small cetaceans.

I have made a more detailed written report to the Rural Affairs Committee, a copy of which will be placed in the Parliament's Information Centre.

I am delighted to announce that I have appointed Professor Peter Timms and Mr John Alex MacPherson to the Board of Caledonian MacBrayne Limited as non-executive directors from 1 July. The company faces many challenges and I am confident that they will make a positive contribution to the future direction of the company. Both of the new appointees live in areas served by the CalMac network and their knowledge and experience will enable them to bring a fresh perspective to the board. In making these appointments I have increased the number of non-executive directors on the board from six to seven. I believe this is appropriate in the light of the challenges the company faces in relation to the need to change the arrangements for delivering ferry services to comply with EU law. I believe the board is well equipped to provide this strategic direction which will enable the company to cope with this period of change successfully.

In addition, two current board members - Mr Lex Gold and Mr Scott Grier - have been re-appointed for a further three years with effect from 1 April 2000.

This is an operational matter for Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise and I have asked the respective chairmen to reply to the member. Copies of their replies will be placed in SPICe.

We are keen to encourage crofter forestry and hope that landlords and crofters can work together on forestry plans affecting crofting land. Woodland Grant Scheme payments are not available to landlords who resume crofting land against the wishes of the crofters and I have asked the Forestry Commission to make this clear to applicants. A similar rule applies to landlords who terminate agricultural tenancies by means of a contested notice to quit.