³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

I have already responded to that in answer to Christine Grahame’s point. I am not content with the figure. We want to see mortalities at their lowest possible level, as I think I have made clear to the committee today. That is why this work is important.

You talked about a jump in the figures. The average number has stayed relatively constant over the past five years. I mentioned a specific example that we believe may have led to an increase in mortalities over the past year, which is why that needs to be investigated. The pieces of work that we are doing are critical in trying to address that. To be crystal clear, we want mortality to be at the absolute lowest possible level. We are not content with the current position, and I do not think that industry will be either. That is why we have to tackle those challenges.

It can vary between 15 per cent and 25 per cent.

Yes—absolutely. In previous responses this morning, I have touched on the work that has been undertaken through the farmed fish health framework. You are right: we are five years on from its establishment. There was a refresh in 2020. The group is chaired by the chief vet, and it brings together the producers, regulators and innovation centres. Fish vets are part of that body, as well. At the time of the refresh, the group looked to refocus its priorities, and the key priorities to focus on were climate change, looking at treatments, and trying to address mortalities throughout that time.

I mentioned in a previous response that one of the key achievements within that time has been the standardised reporting of mortalities. The group has worked on and produced the 10 overarching categories into which they would fall. Work has been done in partnership with SAIC, as well—SAIC has been leading on that—in looking at some of the issues that we know that the industry faces. For example, that work has looked at harmful algal blooms. They are also looking at potentially trying to remove the barriers to vaccination.

A lot of work has been undertaken, and a lot of work is on-going. If the committee would like a fuller update on the work that has been undertaken through the farmed fish health framework, I would be happy to provide that.

The industry publishes the mortality rates by percentage and cause. That is not mandatory, but the industry has a mandatory requirement to record the information on mortality.

We received the Scottish Science Advisory Council report, and we are considering its recommendations and how we respond to it. We had quite a detailed discussion on it at the meeting of the Scottish Aquaculture Council last week, which was very helpful for our consideration.

You are talking about looking ahead and climate change. It is important that the frameworks that we have in place are adaptive and that we are able to look ahead and ensure that we have mechanisms that are flexible to the challenges that we might meet in the future. The farmed fish health strategic framework is important in that regard. A key strand of that work is looking at the challenges presented by climate change, and a few strands of work feed into that. We know that there will be more challenges in the future, so it is important that we have the capacity and capability to deal with them.

Yes.

We have not undertaken a risk assessment at the moment, but, as I have said, a huge number of pieces of work are under way, as should be clear from what has been set out against the recommendations as well as from previous inquiries. In that work, we are addressing some of the challenges that the industry currently faces and challenges that it will face in the future.

I come back to my previous response. It is not possible for me to give a definitive figure for what our mortality rate should be. Jill Barber highlighted that other countries are experiencing similar problems. We want to work to reduce the figure to the lowest possible level. That is why the work that we are doing through the farmed fish health framework and the other strands of work to try to identify the issues is vital.

I know that the suggestion has been made. Obviously, we have in place agreements with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities on how that funding will be distributed to coastal communities, and this is the agreement that we have in place here.

Of course, I welcome and am happy to consider any suggestions, but it is important to remember that, if we were to do what has been suggested, we would have to do so, and look at the community benefit, in conjunction with our local authority partners. We have been able to show how we, together with industry, can deliver this in some of the communities that I have mentioned, and I am keen to make sure that that work progresses.

I would be happy to provide the committee with more information on the implementation strategy, if it would find that helpful. We have timelines and reporting dates set out in that strategy that might be helpful for the committee to receive.