Official Report 673KB pdf
The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-19194, in the name of Audrey Nicoll, on protecting Scotland’s rivers. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament believes that Scotland has abundant rivers and streams, which support a diverse ecosystem and are the lifeblood of the landscape and central to the nation’s brand, economy and sense of place; considers that they are now one of the country’s most nature-depleted and endangered habitats; believes that this has arisen from a range of factors, including major flood events, water scarcity and increasing temperatures; expresses its concern regarding what it sees as the devastating decline in the population of freshwater pearl mussels in Scotland’s rivers, including the River Dee, which flows through the Aberdeen South and North Kincardine constituency; notes the commitment of organisations, including the James Hutton Institute, Dee Catchment Partnership, Dee District Salmon Fishery Board and Cairngorm National Park Authority, to make the freshwaters and freshwater pearl mussel population more resilient to extreme climate events; believes that there is an opportunity provided by the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill to establish a legal framework for biodiversity targets, including in the freshwater ecosystem to ensure healthy invertebrate diversity as an integral part of a fully functioning ecosystem; welcomes the Programme for Government commitment to extend the Nature Restoration Fund to enable funding of multi-year projects to help deliver the priorities set out in the Biodiversity Strategy, and commends everyone working to restore and protect Scotland’s rivers.
12:53
I thank colleagues from across the chamber for supporting my motion on protecting Scotland’s rivers. My thanks go, too, to Susan Cooksley from the James Hutton Institute, and Craig Macadam and Rebecca Lewis from Buglife for their support in developing the motion. I also commend the many organisations, some of which are referred to in the motion, and individuals who are working hard to protect our wonderful rivers.
As the motion says, our rivers provide Scotland with stunning landscapes and a huge ecosystem of animals, plants and micro-organisms. They flow from our mountains through our glens, they cross our lowlands and they eventually reach the sea. They are the lifeblood of the landscape and are central to Scotland’s brand, economy and sense of place. However, our rivers are under threat, causing them to become more nature depleted than ever before. Flooding is among the largest threats to Scotland’s rivers, eroding the soil from riverbanks and leading to the destruction of habitats.
As the nature champion for the freshwater pearl mussel, I draw members’ attention to the findings of a 2023 NatureScot report centred on freshwater pearl mussels in the River Dee, which runs through my constituency of Aberdeen South and North Kincardine. The report found that the mussel population had decreased by 90 per cent since 2002. For context, more than 1 million freshwater pearl mussels have been lost, which is a truly shocking amount. The report links that decline to the devastating effects of storm Frank in 2015, which caused significant damage to the river bed, rendering it largely unsuitable for mussels. The River Dee is the only river in Scotland to have suffered such a loss. However, our other rivers are similarly vulnerable.
Although significant flooding is a natural and important feature of a river’s hydrology, flood events used to be infrequent, occurring once in a generation. However, there has been a marked increase in the frequency and severity of floods. The same climate pressures that have led to increased flooding also contribute to water scarcity. During periods of drought, our rivers face severe stress. Reduced water levels, rising temperatures and lower oxygen concentrations combine to create harsh conditions for aquatic life. Additionally, pollutants become more concentrated, further degrading water quality. Although all river species are affected, those that are unable to move, such as mussels, are especially vulnerable.
Water scarcity poses a significant risk to Scotland’s rivers, and the risk will grow as climate change accelerates. Just this year, we experienced our driest spring in 60 years, leaving the entirety of Scotland in varying degrees of drought. Rivers used to be able to rely on snowmelt from the mountains to ensure healthy and cooler water levels. However, due to rising temperatures, that is no longer the case. In summer 2018, it is estimated that 70 per cent of Scotland’s rivers experienced temperatures exceeding 23°C. That figure is notable, as it is the temperature at which Atlantic salmon exhibit thermal stress. It is of concern that the Met Office is projecting that similar conditions could impact our rivers every other year by 2050.
Many of our native species require colder river temperatures in which to live. As such, riparian woodland expansion not only benefits biodiversity and the overall habitat but provides much-needed shade to cool our river waters. I commend the River Dee Trust on its work to expand riparian woodland along the river. That work is absolutely vital to the long-term survival of Dee salmon. Salmon, of course, host pearl mussel larvae until they drop off, sink to the river bed and grow into mussels. Many such projects are already supported through, for example, the Scottish Government’s nature restoration fund; the Riverwoods initiative, which co-ordinates nationwide efforts to restore and protect Scotland’s riverbank woodlands; and the peatland action project, which supports the improvement of degraded peatlands across Scotland. The Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill offers an opportunity to establish a legal framework for biodiversity targets, including in the freshwater ecosystem. However, an even greater scale of action is urgently needed.
My call to action is to build on the work that is already under way and to develop a national approach to make our rivers and freshwater populations even more resilient to extreme climate events. Further still, considerations could be given to land management policies that drive evidence-based, prioritised catchment-scale management, development of riparian woodland and the diversification of upland land use to protect our natural water stores.
I believe that that aligns with the recently published Scottish Environment LINK report, entitled “Restoring Scotland’s Waters”, which highlights 10 key areas for improving Scotland’s freshwater ecosystems, including adopting a source-to-sea approach, restoring natural processes to rivers and lochs and tackling invasive non-native species. I look forward to hearing the cabinet secretary’s response to that proposition.
The future of our rivers depends on the actions that we take today. The devastating decline of freshwater pearl mussels in the River Dee serves as a stark indicator that change is urgently needed. Our rivers are crucial to sustaining Scotland’s unique wildlife and biodiversity. More than that, they are central to Scotland’s brand, economy and sense of place.
I again thank members for their support in lodging the motion for debate. I very much look forward to hearing colleagues’ contributions.
13:00
I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests regarding the River Dee.
I previously had the privilege of serving as the Scottish Environment LINK species champion for the freshwater pearl mussel, and I am delighted that Audrey Nicoll has taken on that role and has brought today’s debate to the chamber. I support the motion, which addresses the urgent need to protect our rivers and the species that depend on them.
The River Dee is recognised as a special area of conservation for its efforts to protect Atlantic salmon, freshwater pearl mussels and otters. Despite its protected status, the River Dee remains in crisis. Wild Atlantic salmon numbers have dropped to critical levels—NatureScot reports a 70 per cent decline in population over the past 25 years. Atlantic salmon are now officially classified as an endangered species in Scotland, yet they play a central role in our ecosystem and economy. Wild fisheries contribute more than £100 million annually to the national economy—supporting jobs, tourism and local businesses. The Dee alone accounts for £15 million of that, and it plays a vital role in the north-east economy and the constituency of Aberdeenshire West.
In 2022, the Scottish Government published its wild salmon strategy, but, since then, we have seen no meaningful action. External damage is caused by sewage spills, but monitoring of Scottish Water’s activities on the Dee is almost completely absent.
Further damage is caused by the salmon farming industry. The recent storm Amy saw 75,000 farmed salmon escape, to the detriment of wild salmon. The dangers of salmon farming are clear, and I am glad to see this morning that, even if the Scottish Government will not act, the King has continued his purge of titles by removing his royal warrant from Mowi, Scotland’s largest salmon farm. The move is described as “a wake-up call” by campaigners and is one that I hope spurs the Government into action. However, we need a positive strategy that focuses on restoring wild stocks through hatchery support and habitat restoration.
One of the most urgent threats that Scotland’s rivers face today is seal predation. Seals are now frequently observed far upstream in the Dee, even as far up as Banchory, where they are causing significant damage to already vulnerable salmon stocks. I have received a substantial volume of correspondence from constituents, who raise serious concerns about the increased seal activity.
To understand the issue, we must first understand the numbers. Seals eat between 4,000 and 5,000 salmon on the Dee each year, and a salmon will lay more than 6,000 eggs; therefore, the river is losing about 24 million eggs each year. The Dee’s catch this year was 1,500 salmon, and its population is only 11,000 salmon. Despite 45 per cent of the Dee’s salmon stock being removed by seals, the Scottish Government has stated that seal control is unnecessary. That directly contradicts the commitments that were made in April 2024, when NatureScot, the marine directorate and Fisheries Management Scotland acknowledged the problem and pledged to find solutions by October. That deadline has passed, yet seal predation continues unchecked.
The Government’s third review of the seal licensing system, which was published in September, recognises that even a small number of seals can have a damaging impact on wild salmon populations. The same review recommends clearer guidance and more flexible licensing options for conservation purposes, specifically to address seal-salmon interaction in rivers. However, feedback to an application this year showed that NatureScot views seal control as unnecessary. Will the cabinet secretary correct that and commit to real action? Will the cabinet secretary listen to Deeside and ensure that seal licensing is not just considered but progressed, before the conservation of Scotland’s endangered salmon is added to the ever-growing list of Scottish National Party failures?
13:05
I thank Audrey Nicoll for her motion and for securing the debate this afternoon. As the Scottish Environment LINK nature champion for ponds and small lochs—I am the natterjack toad champion, as well—I have a particular interest in today’s debate. Dumfries and Galloway is home to some of our country’s most spectacular and important rivers and waterways, from the Ken and the Dee, whose power is harnessed through forward-thinking hydro schemes that were built nearly a century ago, to the Liddel and the Sark, which have formed the border with our neighbours to the south for centuries.
As Audrey Nicoll’s motion makes clear, the biodiversity of our waterways is crucial to ensure not only that the areas they are in have a blossoming ecosystem but that we, as humans, are able to enjoy what they have to offer. That was not always the case. As a society, we have a lot to be proud of when it comes to the improvement of the cleanliness and sustainability of our rivers in the past years. Not so long ago, rivers such as the Clyde and the Carron could well have carried a Government health warning next to their lifebuoys. We had built industries—not just in the central belt but in our more rural communities—that used our waterways as dumping grounds and made biodiversity a bit of science fiction.
In my region, the work of organisations such as the Galloway Fisheries Trust has been hugely important and a local cornerstone of the wider work that is going on nationally. The existence of the trust is a demonstration of how our use of river resources and the conservation of our rivers go hand in hand. Without the coming together of local district salmon boards in Dumfries and Galloway, the trust would not exist.
The value of freshwater fishing to fragile, rural local economies is huge. We have a world-quality offering of that, and anglers from around the world come to experience it. If our waterways and rivers become biodiversity deserts, we lose not only the natural resource but the economic benefits that it brings.
Groups such as the Galloway Fisheries Trust are not just helping to clean up water. They are working to eradicate invasive non-native species such as Japanese knotweed and giant hogweed, both of which can have huge and devastating impacts on the wildlife along the riverbanks as well as destroy riverbanks through degradation and erosion, forever changing the local environment. Anyone who has tried to buy or sell a house where Japanese knotweed has been found will tell you the huge challenges that it brings. Therefore, although the primary aim of such work might be to protect our natural environment along waterways, it can also bring big economic and social benefits that might not be immediately connected to biodiversity.
The on-going scrutiny and passage of the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill will, I am sure, result in an act that will put nature restoration and biodiversity in our waterways at the heart of Government policy. As climate change figures increasingly in our public policy and decision making, we have to protect the balance in nature, which, as Audrey Nicoll’s motion says, is,
“the lifeblood of the landscape and central to the nation’s brand”.
This debate reminds me of the work that Galloway Fisheries Trust is engaged in—lots of research and lots of projects. I have lodged a motion to recognise one of its recent initiatives, called flowing forward—restoring Galloway’s rivers. When I recently met the trust’s chief executive, Jamie Ribbens, and its chair, Mark Davies, they told me all about some of the work that was going ahead. Jamie described a local project in the River Bladnoch. A farmer there had said that the land was not productive. However, once Galloway Fisheries Trust started its work to remeander the river, do riparian repair and increase the area’s biodiversity, the farmer changed his mind about what “productivity” means—in his mind, it had been only about farming rather than biodiversity and nature restoration.
Galloway Fisheries Trust has also engaged in a temperature-checking project for local rivers, which Audrey Nicoll described. Temperatures have reached more than 30°C in some of our waterways. There is lots to talk about, and I am celebrating Galloway Fisheries Trust today.
13:10
I congratulate Audrey Nicoll, the member for Aberdeen South and North Kincardine, on her excellent members’ business motion and particularly for highlighting the concerns in relation to the River Dee. Those concerns give light to wider issues to do with the river basin management planning process in Scotland and how we are dealing with improvements to water quality and riverine protection in the country. The Government’s policy seems to be centred around the Scottish Environment Protection Agency’s management of river basin management plans, but there is a lack of clarity on how those integrate and on how SEPA can be held accountable for them, and that situation certainly requires improvement.
I had recent cause to engage with this somewhat esoteric issue through a public petition. One of the great aspects of the Scottish Parliament is that the public petitions process can bring to light a lot of issues that are otherwise obscured by the parliamentary agenda. I particularly commend author Louise Welsh and architect Jude Barber, who have recently produced an amazing award-winning podcast called “Who Owns the Clyde?” They set about establishing, in a fairly iterative way, the complex patterns of land and river ownership. A lot of interesting aspects have been unpacked, which precipitated and stimulated a public petition about the idea of creating legal personhood for the Clyde so that certain rights would be attributed to it. Sadly, the Government was not in agreement with that proposal, and the petition was closed last week.
Nonetheless, the process of discussion and the different stakeholder representations elicited a lot of interesting ideas. The fundamental issues are control and accountability. There is no formal mechanism for all stakeholders—there is a vast number of them—who might have a role to play in a river basin to be represented in a coherent manner. There is a real opportunity for further development. Myriad private owners with significant interests are in control of our river landscapes and hinterlands, but there are no formal obligations for them to engage or consult with stakeholders beyond fairly threadbare planning and statutory obligations, which often do not get considered in the round but are considered in little silos by different local authorities. There is a need for greater oversight. For example, the way in which we have developed the national parks process could be a benchmark for future arrangements for our rivers and river basin management.
The Clyde has a long, complex history. Responsibility for it was originally held by a trust port that was established in 1770, before coming under the scope of the River Improvement Trust in 1809. It was then further developed by the Clyde Navigation Trust in 1858, which was subsequently privatised in the 1990s. Those bodies were primarily concerned with the development of industry on the river, but wider considerations now need to be brought to the fore.
In the greater Glasgow and Clyde area, we now have the Glasgow city region and its Clyde mission. They have made it clear that they do not have a role in dealing with the preservation and protection of the Clyde. That is not within their remit; they are purely concerned with economic development considerations. The question then turns to who is responsible for preservation and protection and whether that responsibility should be joined up.
Although the minister is likely to refer to the river basin management plan process, I ask her to consider in her response how those responsibilities, particularly in relation to the Clyde, can integrate better with the Glasgow city region that has been established in the past 10 years and its new role in adopting the Clyde mission. I also ask her to consider how we can bring all that together so that the environmental impact of development of the river, rather than just issues of economic development, are brought into the consideration.
Other rivers in the world have such guardianship arrangements, whether that is the River Ouse in England, the River Atrato in Colombia or the River Meuse in the Netherlands. In her 2025 book, “A Barrister for the Earth: Ten Cases of Hope for Our Future”, lawyer Monica Feria-Tinta notes that rivers should have rights. We need to recognise that emerging reality and the fact that we need a much more considered approach to the development of our river landscapes in Scotland.
13:14
It will not surprise you, Deputy Presiding Officer, that, apart from congratulating my colleague Audrey Nicoll on securing the debate, most of my speech will be dedicated to the River Tweed and its tributaries.
First, however, I will take a wee detour to Galloway—to Rose cottage in Minnigaff. It is where I lived for more than a decade, with two rivers right at the bottom of my garden: the Penkiln and, just beyond it, the Cree. My early experience with rivers was close and observed, with the salmon run in the Cree—the poachers gaffing the fish at night—and the brown trout in the Penkiln when their dorsal fins were exposed to the air because the summer had reduced the river to a wee stream. I saw scary flooding when the two rivers and the mill that lay beyond merged into a sea, with Rose cottage’s garden disappearing below the muddy waters. I saw kingfishers and herons, and I encountered Japanese knotweed for the first time, which was not at that time considered to be an ecological predator.
My love affair with rivers was born then and continues today with the grand old lady: the River Tweed. I even made a point—you might call it a pilgrimage—of going to where it is reckoned the Tweed has its source, which is high above Tweedsmuir, inconspicuous and with not a hint of the grandeur to come.
Our villages and towns have naturally grown around rivers—back then, the rivers were their dual carriageways—but their source of power must not be taken for granted. Two issues that require our attention are pollution—deliberate and casual—and the real and recurring threat of floods where floods did not occur before. We have come to realise that, and not before time.
The Tweed flows 97 miles to the North Sea at Berwick-upon-Tweed, forming part of the boundary between Scotland and England. It travels in my constituency through Peebles, Innerleithen, Walkerburn and Galashiels. It is one of the most ecologically important rivers in the United Kingdom, supporting Atlantic salmon, otter, lamprey and water crowfoot vegetation. Much of the catchment is designated as an area of special conservation and a site of special scientific interest. To this day, even though textile industries, which once perched precariously on its banks, have all but disappeared, it still supports local economies including angling, tourism and agriculture. Of course, it is central to the entire cultural identity of the Borders.
However, the Tweed, like other rivers, faces pressures from diffuse agricultural pollution, invasive non-native species and river bank erosion. Protection and restoration are delivered through co-ordinated catchment management plans under the water framework directive, local action plans, the Scottish Borders habitat action plan and SEPA’s Tweed area management plan. Those provide key policy frameworks to protect water quality and habitats.
Flood protection is major. Although sandbanks have not quite been consigned to a superfluous sandbank pile, other more creative methods are being implemented. I reference, as I have done before, the Eddleston Water project, which, by making it wind and through suitable waterside planting, has methodically changed the direction of the water and slowed Eddleston Water’s flow onwards to join the Tweed. More of such flood protection is done upstream these days.
From Penkiln to Cree to Tweed, I confess that, for me, there is a romance about rivers. They dictated where we live today, what industries we once had and those that we have now. I am with Mr Sweeney: rivers should have rights, if that does not sound a bit strange.
Again, I thank my colleague Audrey Nicoll for giving me the opportunity to praise rivers and speak about their protection. I cannot have too many debates about rivers.
13:19
Christine Grahame is right—there is something about rivers that gets into one’s soul. They are really important for the lifeblood of the nation. They are important for the economy, leisure, the environment, biodiversity and the climate—there is a range of sometimes competing demands on them. I like nothing better than running along a riverside, and I have run alongside many in the Borders, so I concur with Christine Grahame.
I congratulate Audrey Nicoll on opening the debate and lodging this motion. The Dee is one of the great rivers; it is a powerful river that contributes significantly not just to the economy of the area—as Alexander Burnett, rightly, highlighted—but its biodiversity.
If anybody is in any doubt that there is climate change, they just have to look at water. In the past few years, we have had everything from devastating floods to water scarcity. That scarcity has had a dramatic impact on the yields of farmers. I had thought that vegetables and potatoes would be impacted, but it turned out—bizarrely—that, in north-east Fife, it was barley yield, of all things, that was affected. That was at a time when the whisky industry was under quite a bit of strain and taking less of that commodity. Nevertheless, the impact of climate change is very clear.
What has come through from all contributions to the debate, including Paul Sweeney’s, is the wide diversity of rivers. They are not all the same; they have different topographies, sizes, flows, soil types, economic value and surrounding populations. Therefore, we need different answers for every river.
I have heard people talk many times about Eddleston Water, which is a great project. They keep telling me that the same approach would apply to the River Eden in Fife, but there are so many differences between the Borders and Fife, and we should not think that simple, well-worked and successful solutions in one part of the country will apply without change to other parts of the country. I want a plan for every different type of area.
Solutions to flooding, for instance, are very clear. We have seen from infrastructure projects just how much money we are spending on flood prevention schemes—the cost is soaring. We cannot afford to do those things everywhere, so we need to look at natural flood management systems. However, I feel that we are not even at the races when it comes to discussing with farmers and landowners exactly what will work in their area. I know that it takes a lot of work to get down to that level, but river basin and catchment management plans are just so remote—they are way above everything else, and they do not involve discussions with landowners at ground level in the way that is needed to change their practice. Secondly, there are no incentives for them to change. Why would they? They know what they know about how to work their land, and they need to be encouraged and incentivised to make changes to the way in which they operate.
Just now, we are not making any such changes. Two years after the devastating flood in Cupar in my constituency, not very much has changed. We have lots of talk and lots of plans—a Cupar flood study is coming up—but I have not seen very much actual change.
I pay tribute to the River Eden Sustainability Partnership, which is working with landowners on removing invasive species from that river. It is doing some really good—and hard—work, and if we can get a partnership approach going between it, the farmers and all who have an interest in the river, we might be getting somewhere.
13:23
What a great debate this has been about Scotland’s rivers, and I thank Audrey Nicoll for it. I always like such debates, in which people champion things in their constituencies and regions, and I agree whole-heartedly with Christine Grahame and Willie Rennie about rivers being part of our identity and where we live.
Members will forgive me if I squeeze in some mentions of rivers in my constituency; I know that I am not really supposed to speak in terms of my constituency, but I cannot talk about rivers without occasionally mentioning the Ythan and the Don.
I am in no doubt that members recognise the vital importance of protecting Scotland’s rivers and streams. The Tay, the Forth, the Spey, the Dee, the Don, the Ythan, the Eden and the Tweed have all been mentioned, and they support the nation’s economy. Thousands of jobs in rural communities are directly dependent on the food, drink, tourism and recreation industries that our rivers sustain, so any problems with the rivers will have massive knock-on effects.
I am very alive to Willie Rennie’s discussion of water scarcity, its impact on yields and the additional stress that it put on farmers, who, basically, were told that they could not take any water from rivers over certain periods. Rivers on the east coast, in particular, were at very low levels until recently.
The case for biodiversity is beyond dispute. Rivers and their flood plains support the highly diverse habitats and ecosystems of otters, salmon, dippers and damselflies.
Humans thrive in rivers, too. I hope that members will forgive me for mentioning that one of my most treasured recent memories of my late sister is of our swimming in the frankly perishing River Dee at Cambus o’ May two years ago. The water was not 23° on that summer day, I can tell you.
Indeed, I also want to mention wild swimming and how Scotland has become the destination for that activity, with people from across the UK coming to swim in our rivers. Swimming, wild or otherwise, is one of the best things to do in Scotland, and people are coming here for that new and trendy pastime. The fact is that Scotland’s rivers are respected and loved by people from well beyond our borders.
I have heard today about the on-going threats to our river environments and the species that depend on them. The freshwater pearl mussel has been mentioned, as has the Dee salmon. I recently met representatives of the River Dee Trust to discuss some of its suggestions for protecting salmon in that area, and I was also very interested to hear what Emma Harper had to say in her speech about what the Galloway Fisheries Trust has been doing.
In fact, I want to note the importance of river trusts throughout the country and of the incredible work that volunteers do, particularly in tackling invasive non-native species. Giant hogweed is a real threat to our riverbanks; it is nasty stuff, and it is particularly difficult to handle. It seeds at an alarming rate; in fact, it is almost a Sisyphean task to deal with it, and I commend the work done by river trusts in keeping giant hogweed and other species down.
At this point, I want to mention the Scottish invasive species initiative, which is a groundbreaking partnership led by NatureScot to tackle the problem alongside rivers. It covers a third of Scotland’s total area, and phase 2, in 2023, was awarded more than £2 million under the nature restoration fund.
I am pleased that so many people have mentioned the importance of that fund and the work that is being done on our rivers. The fund is a key lever in delivering our biodiversity strategy; it has funded numerous projects from the remeandering of rivers to the creation and restoration of ponds and wetlands, which enhance biodiversity. I was very interested in what Christine Grahame had to say about the tributaries coming into the Tweed, and I know of some particularly impressive work that has been done through the River Peffery catchment restoration programme near Dingwall.
Some members mentioned the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill and the statutory targets. We will have plenty of time to talk about what we do in that regard over the coming months; the targets are challenging but achievable, and they will be developed using expert advice with significant stakeholder engagement. I do encourage volunteers involved in river trusts to get involved in the scrutiny of that bill.
I will take on board Paul Sweeney’s comments about integrating river management with plans. A lot is happening in and around the Clyde—and Mr Sweeney might know that my parents are from Clydebank. The Clyde looks in a lot better shape now than it did in the 1970s.
I certainly agree that the river has improved substantially. We now see much more wildlife, particularly on the upper Clyde, than one would have done half a century ago, given how poisoned it was with the effects of a century of heavy industry.
The petitioners I referred to in my speech were seeking for the role of the Clyde mission partnership board to evolve, purely to consider economic development projects around the city region and the wider issue of the integration of environmental protection. Perhaps the cabinet secretary could consider that opportunity with the city region.
Certainly, and that gives me the opportunity to mention that Glasgow City Council and its partners, have been shortlisted for a 2025 nature of Scotland award in the nature and climate action category, in recognition of the innovative work that the council has been doing to tackle flooding while boosting biodiversity through nature-based solutions. That also involves canals, of which Glasgow has many.
By anchoring the health of our rivers, streams, lochs and wetlands in our biodiversity strategy and delivery plan, the Government has demonstrated its commitment to tackling the biodiversity crisis and protecting our magnificent rivers, species and habitats that the strategy and delivery plan support.
A point that came out of the speeches by Christine Grahame and Willie Rennie—in fact, it came out of everyone’s speeches, from Alexander Burnett to Audrey Nicoll—is that we cannot take the health of our rivers for granted, because the health of our communities very often depends on it. We can see the effects of climate change in water scarcity or in high levels of flooding in winter—indeed, Willie Rennie made that point, too—so we have to do everything that we can to protect and cherish rivers all the more.
I thank Audrey Nicoll for bringing this debate to the Parliament.
13:30 Meeting suspended.Previous
First Minister’s Question Time