Environment and Rural Development Committee, 28 Feb 2007

Meeting date: Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Official Report 94KB pdf

---

Subordinate Legislation

---

Sea Fish (Prohibited Methods of Fishing) (Firth of Clyde) Order 2007 (SSI 2007/63)<br />Scotland Act 1998 (Agency Arrangements) (Specification) Order 2007 (SI 2007/286)

Good morning and welcome to this meeting of the Environment and Rural Development Committee. I remind everyone to turn off their mobile phones. We have received apologies from Ted Brocklebank; I am pleased to welcome Alex Fergusson, who is attending as the Conservative party substitute. No other apologies have been received, so I expect the other members to turn up in due course. I have seen at least one of them in passing in the corridors.

The first item on the agenda is consideration of two statutory instruments. The Subordinate Legislation Committee has made no comments on either order. Members may wish to note that the second is an instrument of the United Kingdom Government but is subject to annulment both here and at Westminster. Do members have any comments on the orders?

I have a comment on the Sea Fish (Prohibited Methods of Fishing) (Firth of Clyde) Order 2007, to bring us up to date. Members will recall that we discuss a similar order each year and that, after the previous event, we received a ministerial statement in response to questions about why the boundaries were drawn where they are on the map that is on the back of the explanatory note. In the meantime, we have dealt with petitions relating to Lamlash bay and the fact that cod is spawned there, as we have seen from films that were taken in Lamlash bay.

We questioned why the boundaries were drawn as they are between Kintyre and a line that runs just to the south of Lamlash bay, but we never received a fully satisfactory answer from the minister. In his letter dated March 2006, Ross Finnie states:

"Available scientific data on the state and distribution of the Clyde cod stocks is of insufficient resolution to provide us with confidence that the precise formulation of the Clyde regulation offers optimal protection for the spawning cod."

In that context, I question why the boundaries were drawn where they are.

Although I accept that it is important for us to pass the order now, I wonder whether we can ask the minister for further clarification. Next year another committee will be asked to do exactly the same thing, without having any more precise information.

Our timetable would allow us to leave the matter over for another week, if you would like us to write to the minister and get a letter back for next week.

I am happy to do that, if the committee wishes.

Are you happy for us just to write to the minister and to pass the order today?

I would be happy for us to pass it, because we want to pass it. However, I would also be happy for us to write to the minister asking for further information that would take the issue a little further forward.

I am content to do that. I note that there was a meeting on 12 March with the various parties that are involved. It would be good to get an up-to-date position on the matter. Does the committee agree to do that?

Members indicated agreement.

Do members have any comments to make on the Scotland Act 1998 (Agency Arrangements) (Specification) Order 2007?

No.

Are members content with the instruments and happy to make no recommendation to the Parliament?

Members indicated agreement.