Fergus Ewing
Independent · Scotland
“Last October, the Chinese renewables company Ming Yang announced an investment of £1,500 million in my constituency, which would initially create 1,500 direct jobs and lead to 4,000 jobs in phase 3.”
“As her cabinet secretary, I thank her for her diligence as a minister and congratulate her on the successful passage last week of a vital piece of Government legislation that was also supported across parties. I am glad that the bill that we have worked on together will—as I hope—pass this evening. It sends a strong signal.”
“I turn to the concerns of stakeholders, and particularly the teaching trade unions, with whom I have spent a lot of time in the past three years. First, I am sympathetic to some of the concerns from the teaching trade unions.”
“I will embarrass the minister now with all this praise in front of his colleagues, but he is known to be pro-business, and that is a good thing. Sadly, he is an oasis of common sense amidst a desert of disdain and disinterest.”
“Most practitioners will not need training, but those that do, definitely need it. Therefore, we need a focus on the training and on ensuring that it is available to all practitioners who require it.”
“Its work was diligent, detailed and critical to providing the scrutiny that allowed the bill to be improved. I pay tribute to Douglas Ross. He has been a diligent parliamentarian throughout, and I agree with him on what the Parliament needs to aspire to being when it comes to how it works and how contributions are made.”
The complete record
Every one of 452 lines we hold for Fergus Ewing, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 10.
“All four ministers know that I have opposed the tax from the outset, and that I voted against it. It is a percentage tax on which additional VAT will be payable—in other words, it is two sets of tax. The minister knows that I have argued that the tax is uncollectible and that it will lead to a fiasco, that nobody has worked out how to collect it and that the information technology systems that will be necessary to administer it do not exist. Does he agree that it might be the death knell of many hard-working and excellent bed-and-breakfast establishments in the Highlands and throughout the country? He has been told that again and again. Will he call a halt to this outrageous and poorly designed tax? Ivan McKee: The member will be aware that it is up to local authorities to choose whether to implement the tax.”
“What he outlines shows the necessity of more grid infrastructure connections across Scottish and the whole of the UK so that the green electricity that is being produced can make it into the grid, which would mean that more developments, such as the one that Mr Ewing has mentioned, are connected. The Presiding Officer: That concludes the ministerial statement on the climate change plan monitoring reports. There will be a brief suspension before we move on to the next item of business. 15:25 Meeting suspended. 15:26 On resuming— Business Motion”
“In my constituency, a house builder states that he cannot get an electricity connection for a large development of affordable and mid-market-rent houses because of green tape requiring a new heat pump and electric vehicle charging points, which would lead to the electricity demand tripling. Is that a case of green tape stymieing the creation of the houses that will be needed for the 18,000 jobs that Highlands and Islands Enterprise predicts will be created for the renewables revolution? If so, will that green tape be removed so that we can get the people who are needed to deliver the renewables revolution in the Highlands? Gillian Martin: I assume that Mr Ewing is referring to the new build heat standard.”
“That is why we have committed to supporting disabled people to move into sustainable employment through specialist employability support from summer 2025, across all 32 local authority areas, supporting closer working between employability provision and employers.”
“That is why we are investing more than £40 million in parental employability support in every local authority area, to tailor employability services to parents. We want to improve inclusive recruitment practices, including flexible working and support for disabled employees. Although the Government will continue to create opportunities and roll out support for disabled people, such as our recent national roll-out of the pension age disability payment, we continue to call on the UK Government to immediately drop its cruel benefit cuts, which target the most vulnerable in our communities. The Scottish Government is unashamedly investing in the communities that the Labour Government seeks to penalise.”
“However, growth alone is not enough, because running a distillery is not only about letting the water flow—it is about care, concentration and co-ordination to ensure that all parts of the process work together. As we grow our economy, we must do it in a way that ensures that every business, community, individual, family and child have the chance to contribute to and benefit from that growth. Our aim is simple: we want to build a fair and inclusive economy, increase employment and raise wages. One example thereof is the expansion of the fairer futures partnerships, which enable partners to help more families to access the support that they need, where and when they need it, and to maximise incomes and access to sustained employment or education opportunities.”
“Kate Forbes: I am very supportive of the sector and, indeed, have had the great pleasure of visiting West Fraser and seeing the expansion in which it has invested. It is one of our finest examples of a brilliant-quality Scottish resource, which, through supporting the manufacturing sector and, ultimately, building houses, has a triple impact on the economy. I am happy to continue to engage with the sector, and the First Minister just told me that he had bumped into and had a very constructive conversation with sector representatives today. Economic growth is like turning the distillery’s water on. It lets fresh energy, jobs and innovation flow into the heart of our communities.”
“At lunch time today, I chaired the cross-party group on the wood panel industry, which supports the wood panel products sector. Several industry leaders were there, who very much hope to meet the First Minister shortly to discuss the enormous, positive potential of that sector across the whole of the economy—indeed, the sector contributes around £200,000 per annum gross value added per person in employment. As the Deputy First Minister will know, West Fraser has received some of the largest investments. Does the Deputy First Minister agree that there is enormous potential to support that industry? Does she and the First Minister support having a full, Government-led debate to allow us all to work together to explore how we can unlock that enormous potential for Scotland?”
“The First Minister: Mr Ewing raises an important point about the need for energy security and for base-load capacity. I do not doubt the premise of the question that he puts to me. The issues can be addressed in different ways, however. As part of the renewable energy mix, we can take steps on long-duration energy storage technologies; we can take forward work on pumped hydro storage; and we can take steps on battery storage. Mr Ewing asked me specifically about gas power stations. He will know that there is a live planning application with ministers, so I will avoid commenting on that question, but there is a wider solution to the important issue that Mr Ewing puts to me, which has to be addressed to deliver security and safety for the population of”
“The recent blackouts in Spain and Portugal caused havoc to the vast majority of people in those countries, with the cost of putting it right having an initial estimate of around €4 billion. Those countries rely heavily, as we do, on renewables. The First Minister has ruled out nuclear, and there is no coal. That just leaves gas. Does the First Minister accept that, to provide stability for the national grid, it is necessary to provide base-load or back-up? The only option remaining on the table is gas. Will you support new gas stations, which are tremendously cleaner and more efficient than the old ones, and which can help to protect us against the risk of blackout in Scotland and the UK? The Presiding Officer: Always speak through the chair, please.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the net zero secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding the potential impact on Scotland of the Rosebank and Jackdaw oil and gas developments not proceeding, including on jobs, gross domestic product, tax revenue and funding for public services from the United Kingdom Government. (S6O-04604)”
“Natural gas is an essential component of an electric power system that is heavy on intermittent renewables that depend on wind and sun.” Moreover, although I am not an expert or scientist, I highlight that the combined-cycle gas turbines are now more efficient because they use the hot exhaust from the gas turbines to heat water, creating steam to drive a second turbine, producing more electricity. They are 50 per cent more efficient than ordinary gas turbines. They can be built in four to six years, rather than 10 to 12 years, as is the case for a nuclear power station. They can be built on budget, unlike nuclear power stations, and there is no waste to dispose of at the end of the process. That is why Britain should go for more gas, and more gas storage. We have only a few days of gas storage in the UK—in Germany, they have months.”
“variety alone.” In the past 48 hours, we have seen blackouts occurring in Spain and Portugal, which, incidentally, have initially been estimated to have cost €4 billion. On a similar event in Britain, Daniel Yergin, who is arguably the world’s most informed energy expert, said: “The near blackout in Britain in January this year, caused by the conjunction of cold weather, low wind production and unavailable cross-border transmission lines, demonstrated the glaring imbalance between rapid growth in renewable energy on the one hand and insufficient infrastructure and lack of alternative supplies on the other.”
“There is simply no doubt about it, and one does not have to be Warren Buffett to understand it; anyone with a rudimentary understanding of business can only come to that conclusion. Diagnosis, however unpleasant, is no use— Murdo Fraser: Will the member take an intervention? Fergus Ewing: I certainly will. Murdo Fraser: Given that we have established that it is not the level of gas in the energy mix that causes high electricity prices, to what does the member attribute that, and what is his solution? Fergus Ewing: With regard to electricity generation, the answer has been put best, and will never be bettered, in the statement by Winston Churchill that, when it comes to electricity supply, the solution is “variety, and ...”
“If a business is producing industrial manufactured products such as steel, aluminium, chemicals, fertiliser, paper or cement, and if its energy costs are four times higher— perhaps even 50 per cent higher—than those of competitors in Germany and France, that business, which is producing a commodity that can be produced in many advanced countries, is going to lose custom because it is pricing itself out of the market, and it will make a loss. That is why we are here on this very sad day, which sees the termination of oil refining in an oil- producing country. It is a dreadful and ghastly day for the workforce, and for everybody who is proud of Scotland and our magnificent oil and gas industry. However, unless the problem is addressed, there will be more Grangemouths and Scunthorpes.”
“I also do not have time today to go over the briefing that I obtained from Tom Uppington—who, as the cabinet secretary will know, heads up operations at Lochaber, with which we are both acquainted—except to say that in that briefing, Tom said: “Current energy market prices do not make it financially economical to produce primary aluminium in the UK.” That brings me to the underlying central question of this debate, which is not just a general discussion about industry. Unless the high energy costs in the UK are addressed, it is difficult to see, even as an optimist, any other scenario than the inexorable and almost inevitable decline—and, sadly, death—of industry in Britain. I use that pessimistic phrase because I have thought about it deeply and read about it fairly widely. It is very simple.”
“I congratulate the cabinet secretary on her contribution and I welcome the fact that we are debating industry. We should perhaps debate all sectors of industry separately, because I will not have time today to talk about the Scotch Whisky Association’s briefing and the 10 or 12 points that it has raised—for example, extended producer responsibility being eight times the cost of what is applicable in other countries if the UK Government goes ahead with it, which I hope that it will not. I do not have time to cover the briefing that I have had from Liberty Steel, which has pointed out, as other companies have done, that there should be an obligation in the UK to purchase UK steel. That is perfectly deliverable.”
“I move, That the Parliament recognises the value of Scotland’s heavy industrial and manufacturing sectors, and the significant contribution that they make to the national and regional economy; notes recent developments in global trade policy and their potential economic impact; welcomes the UK Government’s intervention in British Steel to support the continued resilience of the supply chain, and believes that the UK Government should give similar consideration to its engagement with the Grangemouth oil refinery, given its significance to national resilience and high-quality job opportunities.”
“We want to see positive decisions on awards to Acorn and the Scottish cluster to further enhance Scotland’s international reputation, and we do not want to see decisions being taken on behalf of our industries without consulting those industries, not least in relation to a trade deal with the US. I look forward to the debate and commend the motion to Parliament.”
“I know that the Secretary of State for Scotland in particular understands the urgency of that matter. As I close—which will be somewhat of a miracle, considering all the interventions—let me provide some assurances about the way in which we are working to ensure that businesses, workers and the economy navigate the current international headwinds. Despite our limited devolved powers, we are working with enterprise agencies and partners to tackle the barriers to investment, to support our exporters into international markets and to provide assistance and advice on the impact of the national tariffs. There are opportunities ahead, despite those headwinds. This Government has always been, and will continue to be, one that takes action.”
“We cannot risk losing those opportunities, because underpinning the future success of Grangemouth is the development of carbon capture and storage. We need a firm commitment from the UK Government on a timeline and funding for the Acorn project, in order to provide investors and workforces with the confidence that Scotland can capitalise on our comparative advantage. Just last week, the UK Government finalised a £2 billion deal for carbon capture in England. That is why it is even more vital that the Acorn project, which is essential to delivering a just transition and economic growth, is given the green light in the spending review on 11 June. I will continue to lobby UK Government ministers on that. I hope that Parliament can join us so that we speak with one voice on the vital importance of the carbon capture and storage scheme.”
“However, many of the proposals that are outlined in project willow might not meet the criteria that are currently being applied by the fund, and we must not find ourselves in a position in which good intentions are not translated into meaningful practice. I take this opportunity to repeat the call for the UK Government to work with us to leave no stone unturned in efforts to mitigate any future job losses on the site. I call on UK ministers to take that action to ensure that the £200 million commitment is deployed. There must also be clarity; it needs to be made clear, with the same urgency and decisiveness that we saw in relation to Scunthorpe, that the money will be available for Grangemouth as soon as business needs it.”
“Although we welcome the decision to intervene at British Steel, in decisive recognition of the need to protect an industrial asset that is so critical to the UK economy, it stands all the more in stark contrast to the UK Government’s willingness to listen to calls from this Government, trade unions and Labour MPs for decisive action to protect the future of Grangemouth. We have moved quickly to establish a £25 million Grangemouth just transition fund, which is aimed at catalysing near-term opportunities arising from project willow and sends a clear signal that we will work with businesses to make low-carbon projects at Grangemouth. We welcome the UK Government’s confirmation that £200 million has been ring fenced in the national wealth fund to support the deployment of projects at Grangemouth.”
“Kate Forbes: I accept that the UK Government’s engagement was good from the very beginning, but my concern is that, if we compare it with the action that it took in relation to the British Steel plant in Scunthorpe, we cannot conclude that it took an equally decisive and interventionist approach to Grangemouth. The secretary of state answered questions in the UK Parliament on that, making the point about the number of refineries. However, at the end of the day, where there is a will, there is a way. On the scale of intervention that would be required at Grangemouth, that did not happen in the way that it happened at the Scunthorpe plant. I do not think that anybody is in any doubt that it would have required intervention by the UK Government at that level and at that scale.”
“It protects the only plant in the UK that can make crude steel and will, I hope, be part of a comprehensive future strategy for steel-making across the UK. Daniel Johnson: Will the Deputy First Minister give way? Kate Forbes: Presiding Officer, will you remind me how much time I have? The Presiding Officer: Fifteen minutes. Kate Forbes: Oh, wonderful. I give way to Daniel Johnson. Daniel Johnson: Thank you, Deputy First Minister—I will be brief. Despite today’s tragic announcements, does the Deputy First Minister accept that the UK Labour Government came forward with proposals, including quite substantial funds, for Grangemouth within weeks of taking office?”
“It is inevitable that there is concern, and some companies with stock in the US are taking decisions to pause further shipments until the position is clearer. The First Minister spoke to the Prime Minister and made it clear that we need to see bold and decisive action from the UK Government that takes into account Scotland’s particular needs and strengths. A conclusion should not be reached without extensive engagement with the Scottish Government. I know that business wants to see that, too. In recent weeks, the UK Government has taken action to protect the British Steel plant in Scunthorpe. Fergus Ewing outlined some of the reasons why that was required. The UK Government’s decision provides some hope that it is prepared to act when vital national interests and assets are at stake. We welcome that action.”
“By helping some of Scotland’s most cutting-edge technology businesses to grow and scale up their manufacturing operations here, that programme will surely be a welcome boost to our long-term economic resilience. That is all the more important as we look to deliver those things in the midst of very turbulent economic times. Just last week, the International Monetary Fund highlighted the damaging economic headwinds from the tariff increases that the US has imposed. In Scotland, we are already seeing concerns in key sectors such as food and drink, machinery and life sciences. The First Minister recently held a round-table meeting with representatives from Scotland’s business community to hear at first hand the impact of US tariffs.”
“Being clear about the root causes of the issues is vital if we want to support Scotland’s manufacturing base. We are a nation that develops energy sources and that benefits from a surplus of energy in some regards, yet our industrial sites are expressing concern about energy prices. I have raised that reserved matter a number of times with the UK Government. I know that there are on-going discussions about reforms. We need certainty fast, and we need to break the artificial connection between gas and electricity prices. We are working with centres such as NMIS and the National Robotarium to bring to fruition a number of plans for a deep-tech supercluster, which was one of Mark Logan’s original visions. We want Scotland to be a maker, not just a consumer, of world-leading products and innovations.”
“Will the Deputy First Minister take an intervention? Kate Forbes: Who could resist taking an intervention from Mr Ewing as well? Fergus Ewing: I entirely share the Deputy First Minister’s sentiment, but does she agree that the biggest obstacle and greatest challenge that industry faces, whether in Scotland or the United Kingdom, is the fact that the energy costs for energy-intensive industries are four times higher than in the USA and about 50 per cent higher than in Germany and France? That was arguably a cause—if not the major cause—of the problems at Grangemouth and Scunthorpe. We should therefore be debating how we solve that problem, whether here or at Westminster. Kate Forbes: Once again, on that particular issue, I could not agree more.”
“Shirley-Anne Somerville: I have already made reference to the fact that the Scottish Government expects all public bodies and agencies to act within the law and to obey the rule of law. That includes the Supreme Court judgment, but it also includes any other regulations, including the 1992 regulations.”
“Regulation 24 of the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 provides as follows: “Suitable and sufficient facilities shall be provided for any person ... in the workplace to change clothing” and those facilities “shall not be suitable unless they include separate facilities for ... men and women where necessary for reasons of propriety and the facilities are easily accessible, of sufficient capacity and provided with seating.” I understand that all 14 regional health boards are reported to be in breach of this absolutely crystal-clear duty. I have raised the issue two or three times in the chamber before, without comment from the Scottish Government. Will the Scottish Government use its statutory powers under the relevant NHS Scotland legislation to get every health board to comply with the law without further delay?”
“To ask the Scottish Government, in the light of reports that gulls can cause serious human injury, whether it will direct NatureScot to issue licences to control the birds and help prevent such injuries. (S6O-04560)”
“I assure Mr Ewing that the Scottish Government will always take a considered approach to those rulings, which we must bear in mind in any decisions that we take. US Tariffs (Impact of Extension on Scottish Businesses) 5.”
“The First Minister: As Mr Ewing knows, I am a very strong believer in the rule of law. The issues that are—[Interruption.] The Presiding Officer: Let us hear one another. The First Minister: I will say that again, because my belief in the rule of law is part of my entire being. I know that the Conservatives are cavalier about the rule of law, but I am not—not one bit of it. Some of the issues that Mr Ewing raises in his question are influenced by court judgments that have been made. The Scottish and United Kingdom Governments will have to consider the implications of those court decisions, and Mr Ewing, as an experienced parliamentarian and lawyer, will understand the importance of considering those particular rulings as we make decisions. Of course, there could be implications of those judgments.”
“The developers of the Rosebank and Jackdaw oil and gas fields have obtained their necessary exploration and other licences. They have complied fully with all Government regulations. On the strength of that, between them, they have invested well over £1,000 million thus far. If they are now declined final permission because the rules have changed and the goalposts have been moved, the UK Government will almost certainly be pursued for legal claims by those companies for recovery of the sunk costs and, possibly, for the loss of profits extending to several billion pounds or more, and there will be a consequential reduction in the Scottish budget of hundreds of millions of pounds. Will the First Minister, who is not hostile to the oil and gas sector, confirm that the Rosebank and Jackdaw projects must now go ahead?”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it was aware that, prior to NHS Highland taking over responsibility for vaccination services from general practitioners, there were reported concerns that the national health service board’s system did not allow GPs to know their patients’ vaccination status and that this could lead to a heightened patient risk. (S6O-04523)”
“Land reform is a journey. The bill offers hope; it will deliver positive progress and, in so doing, build trust with the people of Scotland. I hope that we can come together today to stand behind the bill’s principles, as they are same principles that have been supported by successive Governments since the Parliament was reconvened in 1999. I move, That the Parliament agrees to the general principles of the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Edward Mountain to speak on behalf of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee. 15:31”
“After all, tenant farmers make up a quarter of Scottish farmers, and our provisions in part 2 of the bill will mean that they are treated with fairness and dignity, including if they choose to leave their tenancies. By modernising small landholder legislation, we are ensuring that no part of land tenure is left behind. The new model of lease for environmental purposes—the land management tenancy—will provide a new tool for land management, enabling people and communities to undertake a range of hybrid land management activities through one lease and helping achieve Scotland’s net zero, biodiversity, and sustainable and regenerative agriculture ambitions. The bill cannot solve all the issues that land tenure is facing, as many are outwith our control, but we remain committed to delivering a fair and vibrant tenanted sector.”
“All that we have to do is look to Europe and examples in France and the Republic of Ireland of how a vibrant tenanted sector can be achieved. The key difference is that they have the fiscal powers that are necessary to encourage those changes. I will keep working with all partners and across this Parliament to ensure that momentum continues to build for a stronger, more resilient tenancy sector. The bill will ensure that tenants today and those in the future have a level playing field, enabling them to deliver improvements to the land that they farm in order to become more sustainable and productive, and enabling tenant farming families to better access the new agriculture support and rural framework so that they can play their part in delivering on key Government priorities.”
“Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention? Mairi Gougeon: I am sorry, but I have to make progress. We have to recognise that reform must be carried out in a way that is fair to all parties, is supported by evidence and is deliverable within the resources and current powers of this Parliament. The measures in part 2 are essential reforms that are needed to deliver equality of opportunity to Scotland’s small landholders and tenant farmers. We want to offer our tenant farmers a future that we would want for ourselves—one with security and dignity at its heart. We want a vibrant tenanted sector, ensuring that we have opportunities for the next generation. More diverse land ownership is not incompatible with those aims.”
“They should go back to the wine bars, prepare for the revolution over the Chablis and let the salmon farming industry continue to contribute greatly to the commonweal and the wealth of the Highlands and Islands of Scotland. 15:51”
“Why not in salmon farming? This is the critical point. I have been to these islands, I have visited these communities, I have been in the cabinet secretary’s job and I know that, without this industry being encouraged to achieve its great potential, as it should do with the implementation of the Griggs report, to which I alluded, and with the Scottish Environment Protection Agency—and perhaps the marine directorate, too, in some cases—acting as a blockage, we cannot achieve what we need to achieve. And if we do not do that, the depopulation problem in the Highlands and Islands, which is already acute, will become fatal. If the Greens had their way, there would be no communities left in large swathes of the Highlands and Islands.”
“During my time as cabinet secretary, my visits to Shetland reinforced the huge importance of fish farming and of carrying on the seafaring and fishing traditions of the great people of the isles of Shetland. I think that it is time for a bit of truth about the value of the salmon industry. Critics also argue that the industry attracts foreign investment, as if that is wrong. Well, hang on a second. I am talking not about Mr Mountain, but about non-governmental organisations and the Green Party. Was it not Mr Trump who said that foreign investment is bad? Why are the NGOs and the Greens adopting the language of the current President of the United States? That is absurd. Scotland is an open economy. We rely on investment in all our sectors, and we routinely praise our performance—second only to London— on inward investment.”
“I received a briefing yesterday indicating that, in the north-west Highlands, there are 1,000 direct jobs, and there are 470 in Shetland and 180 in Orkney. Bakkafrost has 60 sites and employs more than 500 people, and I believe that more than 1,600 people are employed by Mowi. Overall, the industry employs 12,500 people, and, for every person who is directly employed by a salmon farm, there are eight others employed in the supply chain. I hope that the Green Party will recognise that it is—I will be careful about the words that I use, Presiding Officer, as I do not want to transgress any rules, even by accident—peddling matters that are simply untrue. It is talking Scotland down and damaging our most remote communities. I agree with every word of Beatrice Wishart’s brilliant speech in the debate on Tuesday.”
“I hope that that is a high-level answer. The industry has done enormous things, including investing in modern hatcheries. I was privileged to open Mowi’s hatchery in Invergarry. Modern hatcheries will advance fish health, because young salmon spend more time there and less time at sea, which is a good thing. Those fish will be out more in open sea waters, where there are fewer fish. Those are all good things— should we not recognise that? We do in every other industry, so why is the salmon industry singled out for such rampant abuse? In a debate in the chamber on Tuesday, Ariane Burgess said that, in the Highlands and Islands, “only 253 full-time roles have been created over the past 35 years ”.—[Official Report, 18 March 2025; c 30.] That is utter nonsense.”
“I think that they need to blow their trumpet a little more loudly and frequently, because the industry has taken action to cut mortalities and successfully tackle sea lice, and, as the cabinet secretary rightly indicated, there have been matters entirely out of the industry’s control that have led to great problems. The industry has not ignored those; it has tackled them. Finlay Carson: Does the member acknowledge that the committee’s report absolutely appreciated the reduction in mortality due to sea lice and the efforts that the industry had made on that? It lies at the door of the Scottish Government to drive collaboration between all bodies to ensure that they can be more fleet of foot in addressing future issues. Fergus Ewing: I will come to that. In principle, we all want to work well together.”
“Salmon Scotland’s briefing says that it provided evidence to the committee that the investment has resulted in a significant improvement in fish survival, as well as record low levels of sea lice. Recently published Government statistics reiterate that, but Salmon Scotland says that, sadly, the committee’s report “did not cite this evidence that was provided by the sector and Scottish Government regulators.” I have discussed some of the issues and achievements with industry leaders whom I know quite well from my time as cabinet secretary.”
“In my view, salmon farming is one of the greatest success stories in modern Scotland, yet I believe that it is the most undervalued. Furthermore, I am not aware of any other industry that is the subject of more politically motivated, unjust and ill- informed attacks than our aquaculture sector. I was pleased to hear the cabinet secretary defending the industry against some of the arguments that are so frequently made. My patch, Inverness, has the headquarters of Gael Force Marine, which was founded 40 years ago by the then young Stewart Graham and which is now operating internationally with great success and to high standards. The industry has invested massively and arguably more than any other industry in Scotland—£1,000 million.”
“Time is short and I have managed to cover only a fraction of the report, but I will conclude by saying this: in light of the lack of progress in certain areas over the past seven years, the committee seriously considered recommending a moratorium or pause on new salmon farms or on the expansion of existing farms. However, the committee agreed to give the Scottish Government one year to implement our recommendations and for that work stream to have dedicated ministerial oversight to ensure delivery.”
“The committee noted that the industry felt the most frustration about the difficulty of navigating the consenting and planning process for the siting of new salmon farms. In 2018, the REC Committee called for immediate dialogue between the Scottish Government and the industry to develop a mechanism to allow farms to relocate to sites that are more likely to promote good fish welfare and allow for the mitigation of environmental impacts. It is disappointing that there is no evidence that those discussions have taken place, and the committee recommends that that is now progressed as a matter of urgency, alongside a detailed analysis and assessment of the potential risks that that could have for fish health and welfare and of the economic and social impacts on fish farm staff and communities.”