Chamber and committees

Thanks.

I do not know whether my question will take us backwards, but I am thinking about what was said about the fact that we do not have numbers that accurately reflect the deer population. Duncan Orr-Ewing said that it was 10 deer per square kilometre, but that is the figure for red deer. Tom Turnbull mentioned the fact that we do not have accurate numbers, although we do, to an extent, in the Highlands. We measure what action is needed when there is deer damage and restoration is required. On top of that, there are all the different deer species. Does it matter whether we have accurate data if we measure the extent of the issue by looking at interventions that are based on damage or restoration requirements?

Baseline data is going be collected and co-ordinated. I assume, therefore, that NatureScot will need to work with, say, Forestry and Land Scotland to ensure that everybody is aware of how the data is being collected and that it is being measured or analysed, or the level of damage is being assessed, to see whether a tipping point has been reached and a section 8 order is required. Am I correct in saying that partnership working will be required to collect that data?

We are not talking about south of the central belt, because, the last time we took evidence, we heard that lowland deer management included Perth, and Perth is not south of the central belt.

I have a quick thought about the potential for Quality Meat Scotland to be part of the engagement and support of venison as red meat, given that it already provides confidence in beef, lamb and selected pork. Does more work need to be done with Quality Meat Scotland to convey confidence and integrity in the venison food supply chain?

Good morning. You have already touched a little bit on the criteria for managing deer, but I note, for example, that different species of deer occupy the same habitat. NatureScot’s website mentions the deer working group’s recommendation that NatureScot adopt an upper benchmark of 10 red deer per square kilometre; however, that is just in the Highlands, and we know that there are deer in the Borders and in Dumfries and Galloway, and that there are peri-urban deer, too.

What I seek to understand is the need for deer management protocols or policies to be flexible, given that different habitats are being occupied and farmland is being affected. Of course, that is all about damage to property rather than peatland restoration. Is there a need for flexibility in the bill to ensure the creation of guidance that would work for the diverse habitat areas that need to be protected and restored? Is that correct?

The recent visit by the Cabinet Secretary for Transport to the south-west to hear from the campaigns seeking upgrades to the A75 and A77 was welcome. How will the cabinet secretary continue to ensure that the south-west gets the infrastructure and investment that it needs, including, if possible, support for the Kirkcudbright bridge, and engage with stakeholders across Dumfries and Galloway to fully maximise the economic potential of the south-west, as the Scottish Government has done through its hugely welcome funding for the Stranraer Millennium Centre? I invite the minister or the Deputy First Minister to come and see the difference that the funding has made for the community.

I agree with Tim Eagle’s expressing of concern about the UK Labour Government’s attitude to our fishing industry. I fear that Scotland’s fleet will again be hammered as a result of deals done by Whitehall behind closed doors. However, the only reason that those negotiations are happening at all is that Mr Eagle’s former leader at Westminster gambled Scotland’s fisheries and every other sector in our economy on a one-armed bandit Brexit referendum, only to lose and then swan off into the sunset, while his successors carried out the act of dragging Scotland out of Europe against our democratic will. They also did a Brexit deal with the European Union that ended nearly five decades of international co-operation.

Boris Johnson’s trade and co-operation agreement means that a quarter of the existing EU fishing quota in UK and Scottish waters will transfer to the UK in a period of just over five years. To put it another way, which I am sure that the Tories will squeal about from sedentary positions, despite the UK’s withdrawal from the EU and the Tories’ mantra of taking back control and all their hot air and yitterin on and bletherin aboot the benefits of Brexit—we must pay heed to the fact that not all fishers wanted Brexit; as I understand it, inshore fishers were pretty much opposed to it—the EU fleet will retain 75 per cent of its quota in UK and Scottish waters, while the UK Government has zero say on the common fisheries policy. In addition, from next year, the UK Government will have to negotiate fresh access and share of quota agreements with the EU every year. Westminster is desperately trying to avoid having to do annual negotiations and is instead setting up multiyear agreements.

The Tories have got what they wanted—the Brexit that they hold so dear. Mr Eagle comes to the chamber and tries to hoodwink skippers in the fishing industry into believing that his party is on their side. Was the common fisheries policy perfect? Of course not. One of Scotland’s major barriers to fairness under the CFP was the complete inertia and apathy shown by the UK Government every time quotas and take rates were up for negotiation.

I welcome the member’s suggestion that Scotland would have its own voice at the table and would be able to negotiate for itself as a normal independent country.

We know that the CFP wasnae perfect, and we know that one of the barriers under the CFP was the UK Government’s complete inertia; I have just covered that. That did not affect only Scottish fishermen—just ask the former skippers of Grimsby and the Humber, who were sold out by the UK Government decades ago, or the fishermen of Cornwall, who have seen the supply chains to their most profitable markets in France and Spain torn asunder by Brexit and the Tory omnishambles that was set in train by Boris Johnson.

I recommend that members read the Politico article headlined, “How Brexit Betrayed the UK Fishing Industry”. I will give a flavour of what it says about how supportive Tim Eagle’s colleagues were of our fishermen:

“When Johnson cited a rise in the numbers of Dover sole UK trawlers could catch, fishermen pointed out this meant little to the Scottish industry, given the species are primarily found in southern UK waters. ‘He wasn’t across the details,’ said an attendee ... ‘He just could not comprehend that we weren’t happy.’”

We are talking about a UK Tory Prime Minister who could not comprehend the needs of a Scottish industry and Scottish workers. I am shocked.

The Scottish fishing industry deserves this Parliament’s support. It is time for Labour to be honest about the damage that the hard Brexit has done and to stand up for Scottish fishing. Of course, the SNP will do the very same.

I welcome the figures from last month that showed that the national standard on waiting times for children and young people accessing mental health services has been met. The cabinet secretary just gave a comprehensive answer about the work that is going on. How will the Government continue to ensure that progress continues for children and young people across Scotland, including in Dumfries and Galloway?