Reporters
The next item on the agenda is the draft terms of reference for the reports of Maureen Macmillan and Tavish Scott. We welcome Tavish back and congratulate him on the birth of his son. I know that as a modern man he will be playing his full part in the duties associated with a young infant.
The working title of the report is "A Review of the Impact of European List 1 Designated Disease Infectious Salmon Anaemia and List 2 Disease Viral Haemorrhagic Septicaemia on the Scottish Aquaculture Industry". Most members will have heard of ISA because there has been a lot of talk about it, but not many will have heard of viral haemorrhagic septicaemia.
The Scottish salmon farming industry is worried about those diseases. Scottish salmon is not only a quality product of worldwide renown, but supports an industry essential to the nation's economic well-being. It is a key employer in rural areas, particularly in the Highlands and Islands: 6,500 people work in salmon farming and associated downstream activities. The industry is worth around £500 million to the rural economy and most of it is centred in small communities. I was in Shetland at the weekend, where I was told that 40 per cent of the economy comes from the aquaculture industry. That shows how important the industry is for some communities. The impact of infectious salmon anaemia on the industry and the fears over the possible effects of viral haemorrhagic septicaemia are of acute and understandable concern.
ISA was first recorded in Norway in 1984 and has been present in Scottish fish farms since 1998. ISA is a list 1 exotic disease under European directive 93/53/EEC. At present, some 10 per cent of Scotland's fish farms are affected. The disease is not harmful to humans, as it cannot survive in the human stomach, but it is devastating to salmon stocks and is highly contagious. European Union measures to contain the disease are extremely stringent. They include the slaughter of all fish on any farm where the presence of the virus is confirmed, even though that may not mean that the fish have the disease. Even when it is merely suspected that the virus is present, tough controls such as movement restrictions, disinfecting, fallowing and the setting up of control zones around farms are implemented.
The regulations in Norway are different. Norway is not a member of the EU but sells its fish within the EU. It pursues a slightly different policy, which aims to control the disease rather than completely eradicate it. The list 1 status of the disease—the fact that it is an exotic disease—may be undermined if it is shown to be present in the wild. There have been some indications that that may be the case, particularly in salmon parr in fresh water in the River Conon. I believe that there have also been cases involving a trout in the River Tweed and an eel somewhere else.
In December 1999, John Home Robertson, the minister with responsibility for fisheries, announced in the Scottish Parliament that the Executive would be contacting the European Commission with various proposals as to how to deal with the problem of ISA. Those included changes to the strict eradication rules and a review of the criteria in the handling of suspect sites. Ian Hudghton MEP acted as reporter to the EU Committee on Fisheries and presented the proposals, which included a proposal to lift the ban on vaccination. That proposal has now gone through the committee and is awaiting ratification by the Council of Ministers.
Even if there is a relaxation of the regulations, there are still serious problems, particularly related to compensation. It is impossible to insure against losses caused by implementation of the current regulations on ISA because of third-party intervention clauses and the fact that banks are now reluctant to lend to farmers using fish stock as collateral. The disease therefore has severe financial implications. A compensation package announced in 1999 proved unworkable. There are other plans to deliver some help through Highlands and Islands Enterprise. There have been glitches in delivering that, although those may now have been overcome. Nevertheless, there are complaints that the assistance does not go far enough.
Viral haemorrhagic septicaemia is a list 2 disease. In the marine environment, it is found in whitefish. It has been found in freshwater trout farms throughout Europe, but not in the UK. Indeed, there has been only one outbreak of VHS in the UK so far, which devastated a turbot farm in Gigha. An international research project is under way into the prevalence of the VHS virus in European marine waters. VHS has significance for the development of whitefish aquaculture.
My report will examine the incidence and clinical effects of ISA; the current EU regulations for control and eradication of ISA, which are changing at the moment; the financial impact of the disease and the EU regulations on the industry; waste disposal of dead fish and of fish suspected of having the disease; support from the Executive for affected businesses and insurance for the industry. I also want to compare the Norwegian experience and examine possible future developments in aquaculture and in the implementation of the regulations.
I want to examine the incidence and clinical effects of VHS and the present EU regulations. I also want to find out about the importance of whitefish farming to the future of the aquaculture industry.
I do not think that the project will result in the committee proposing legislation, but it may provide the committee with material that will enable it to lobby the Executive about how it tackles the problem of aquaculture and fish diseases.
I do not expect to spend very long on the review—perhaps six weeks to a couple of months. I have drawn up a list of organisations that I am in the process of consulting. It is not definitive, and I am open to suggestions if members can think of other organisations that would be worth consulting. However, I do not want to keep consulting about the same aspects of the project. I have already been to the Northern Marine College in Shetland and talked to the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency. I have an appointment to visit the Marine Laboratory in Aberdeen and am in contact with Aquascot Ltd, which is a salmon-farming firm. I will also get in touch with someone who can tell me about the situation in Norway.
Most travel will be in and around the Highlands and Islands, and some people may come to the Parliament to speak to me. Outside research is coming to me without my asking for it; I am being sent documents about fish diseases in every post.
You are snowed under.
I will be the world's expert on fish diseases by the end of this review.
It is proposed that the project team should be made up of me and David Simpson—who has been taking notes at meetings that I have had. I hope to consult Tavish Scott, whose constituency depends to a great extent on salmon farming. As I said, I spoke to people in Shetland last weekend. The Scottish Parliament information centre has also done some research for me. If anyone else wishes to be involved, they are very welcome.
Maureen has done such a lot already that I must offer my congratulations. I do not know whether all members have it, but I have Ian Hudghton's speech on this subject, which is quite interesting. Maureen's report will be very timely, because it will coincide with the meeting of the Fisheries Council, which will rule on the matters that were raised by the fisheries committee—support for a vaccination scheme and support for compensation.
Like Maureen, I was in Shetland to meet the salmon producers not so long ago. Their burning concern is survival. The small men are likely to go to the wall. That may mean that the big boys can buy them up, but I do not know whether anybody wants that. Some producers are in extreme danger because they cannot borrow from the banks. The banks will not now lend readily to any producers, whether their stocks are affected by fish diseases or not, because they are no longer regarded as security. Because of restocking, many producers cannot afford to carry on.
The Norwegian experience was originally as grave as ours, but Norway has adopted the remedy of containment rather than slaughter. The graphs showing the incidence of fish diseases there suggest that their method is more successful than our rather more drastic one. I think that Maureen is proceeding along exactly the right lines.
It would be helpful if some of the background comments that Winnie has made could be made available to Maureen. I am sure that she would welcome that.
I will inform Maureen of any other bodies that can be added to her list.
Do we think that the terms of reference are right and that the time scale is realistic?
Thank you for your earlier remarks, convener. I am sleeping very well, especially when I am in Edinburgh.
I think that this study is important, but the time scale may be ambitious, given the amount of work that could be done in this area. Maureen may want to relax her deadline of the end of March. My second point relates to the amount of work that is involved here.
As this is the European Committee, we should look closely at the EU regulations and how they impact on the industry because, as Winnie Ewing and Maureen Macmillan will agree, that is the area that we are getting representations on. There is a lot in a study that has just been done by an industry-Government working group. The report is 2 in thick and loaded with information, most of which you could cut out and paste in. It is important that this study concentrates heavily on EU legislation and regulations, and for Maureen to identify where they can be improved, amended or enlightened.
There are two aspects to the effects of the regulations. There are economic implications, from how much disinfection costs to whether Tesco will buy the salmon if it hears that it comes from a designated zone. I have been in contact with the industry over the past two or three months, so I know quite a lot of the background. I am not too worried about the two-month time scale, but I may have to come back to the committee if I cannot do it.
The other issue is fallowing, and eradication rather than control. I want to look in some detail at whether the Norwegian system is better. There is a lot of anecdotal evidence at the moment, but we have to get some firm evidence.
What about Tavish's suggestion about concentrating on EU legislation? Are you happy with that?
Yes. That is fine, but other issues will arise.
Are we content with Maureen's proposals, and that she has the right to come back to the committee if she finds that the time scale is a bit tight?
Members indicated agreement.
Thank you, Maureen. As Winnie said, you have done a power of work already.
The next reporter is Tavish.
I will be really brief. I hope that this report is a targeted and precise piece of work. EU legislation affecting agriculture in Scotland is, as any member here with a rural constituency or region will be all too well aware, a constant bugbear, and we are receiving an increasing number of representations about it. It is important to look at how EU regulations apply to Scottish agriculture plc, and at whether we can find ways in which the regulations can be tuned in a way that is more appropriate for our industry. Also, there has always been a perception that EU regulations are applied more diligently in the United Kingdom than they are in other parts of the European Union. I would like either to prove or to disprove that, and I would be happy to proceed on that basis. It is targeted work.
As with Maureen's report, in respect of which a recent Government-industry study has come out, I am aware that a red tape review has just been completed by an industry working group. It has a lot of solid information in it, but when it came to EU agriculture regulation it looked at just the arable sector, so there is room to look in a focused way at perception and reality. The rest of this document is self explanatory. People who are interested will have read it, so I will not go over it.
Thank you, Tavish. Are there any comments?
Tavish, could you add forestry, because crofters are complaining about woodland grants being cut?
I am happy to do that.
Would the inquiry touch on broader aspects of reform of the common agricultural policy, or is it more focused than that?
I suggest that it is more focused than that. Reform of the CAP is an area that will emerge from the Commission's work. I suspect that we will have the opportunity, when we are in Brussels at the end of March, to pursue that question with the Commissioner for Agriculture and Fisheries, Franz Fischler. Dennis could ask his question then, and we could see whether there was a further piece of work that someone might take forward.
We are meeting Mr Fischler, so that provides an opportunity. Do we agree the remit and the time scale?
Members indicated agreement.