Chamber and committees

You are absolutely right: it is critical that we ensure that we hear those voices. That is referenced throughout the JFS, which is always looking to consider the impact that decisions will have, not just on immediate stakeholders but on our wider communities. We want to make sure that engagement is as transparent, open and inclusive as it can be.

Of course, there are lots of complex issues to balance within that, and ultimately we want to make sure that we have a healthy marine environment and a profitable fishing industry that provides a sustainable source of protein, which is vital for our diet. We need to get the balance right between all the different considerations. However, you are absolutely right—we want the people who are most impacted by the decisions that we make to be part of the process and we want to work with them.

As I highlighted in my previous responses, we have a strong track record of co-management and engagement with stakeholders. We have a variety of forums in which we engage with stakeholders but, as I have also said, it is important that we do not just consider them in silos. This is about bringing our stakeholders together to find a way forward through the complex issues that we face, and to discuss the other challenging decisions that we will no doubt face, as we go into the future.

Yes, it would be adhered to. That measure is more about efficiency. It is important to remember that the framework includes a memorandum of understanding, which determines how we would address any potential conflicts or issues and the stage at which those would be dealt with. However, we do not anticipate that being an issue. As I said, the matter was subject to a lot of discussion when the LCM was considered.

I hope that I was able to explain in my previous response, even partially, how the regional inshore fisheries groups have come together. That was a means of trying to engage with fishers who have been hard to reach. It is vital that we have been able to do that work and that we established that network.

We covered stakeholder engagement a couple of weeks ago when I was at the committee talking about the co-management processes that we want and the people with whom we want to engage. Rather than their being in silos, this is about how we can bring our stakeholders together and collaborate. We are giving that active consideration. The issue is out for consultation at the moment, as are our other policies, which I hope all stakeholders will engage with. I am happy to take any feedback about the processes or any thoughts that stakeholders have about how those processes might be improved for the future.

Of course, that is something that has to be managed. As I said, challenging timescales have been set out for the FMPs in the JFS. Trying to meet those timescales is important, because that is what has been set out in the legislation, but we want to make sure, when we are creating the FMPs, that we are getting that right, that it is not rushed and that we are able to undertake that work in the way that we wish to.

We will be discussing these things with other administrations and working jointly with them as we develop FMPs. I would just note that although we have not set out anything beyond that timescale, the timescales for developing the FMPs set out in the JFS will be very challenging to meet. It is important that we focus on the stocks that we have highlighted as a priority, but that is not to say that there will be no other FMPs. The issue will be subject to review, but I think that that is where we need to focus. Instead of setting out some definitive list of every stock that we would look to consider and the timescales in that respect, we need to focus on this initial set of FMPs.

We will be closely monitoring the work on developing FMPs for non-quota stocks that other administrations are leading on. As I have said and as Paul McCarthy has highlighted, that work will be very complex, and it is important that we continue to monitor it before we set out what FMPs we plan to take forward in that area.

Yes, there were discussions between the four Administrations in setting out the JFS. I am glad that we have been able to align on the policies and objectives that are set out in it.

Stakeholder engagement has been critical to that. In the development of the JFS, a community of interest sought to gather stakeholder views from throughout the UK and kept stakeholders involved throughout the process.

Perhaps Paul McCarthy or Allan Gibb will want to say more about stakeholder engagement.

It is not possible for me to say at the moment. That detail will come when I look to make that announcement.

What we have set out will help to tackle the issues that there have been. We believe that the practical measures can be adhered to and will help us to tackle some of the challenges. We are in the middle of the consultation process, so we await further feedback on the issue.

We would need to implement the policy that would deliver on the objective.