³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

I realise that Edward Mountain is picking out evidence that was given to the REC Committee at that time, but we would need a fuller understanding of exactly where the figure came from to know whether we are comparing like with like in terms of data. We are getting into a discussion about figures that are not necessarily comparable.

Jill Barber touched on that. The previous technical standard was introduced in 2015, and we are starting the initial work.

That was one of the key recommendations in the report, and it has been a key focus of our work since the recommendations were published. In a second, I will hand over to Jill Barber, who will be able to provide more detail.

The work has been taken forward in phases. The key reason for the work is to streamline the process. As we have heard today, a number of different bodies are involved, and the picture is quite complex, particularly for those looking in from the outside, given the different requirements that are expected of fish farming businesses. It is really important that we streamline the process and make it as efficient as possible, and that we learn and improve through that process.

That comes back to the points that Jill Barber made about the work that we set out in the vision and the overall work that needs to be done.

I know that that consideration that has been raised. The convener mentioned wind farms and community benefits. We always need to be careful, but it is a reasonable expectation that, when communities host fish farms, there is a benefit to be seen from that. We have already talked about what the industry provides within its local communities, as well as the coastal community benefit more widely that is delivered through local authorities and the funding.

I do not think that it is the case that we are pinning all of our hopes on one sector. The point that I am trying to illustrate is that salmon production is a very economically important sector for Scotland in terms of the food produced and the jobs supplied throughout the supply chain.

You are absolutely right about the figures that were produced, and you have outlined some of the reasons for them. Most businesses are trying to move towards automation, introduce new technology and innovate, and that does not necessarily lead to an increase in jobs. Nonetheless, the sector has an important footprint in our rural and island communities, as well as across Scotland through the wider supply chain, as I have mentioned. I do not think that that takes away from the importance of the industry as a whole.

As you have heard me say in the committee a number of times, across all the areas of my portfolio, industries like agriculture, forestry and fisheries, more widely, are all hugely important to rural Scotland. It is not necessarily the case that we are focusing on salmon production more than on other areas. We want to make sure that we have sustainable industries that, as a whole, are providing valuable employment.

First, I want to respond to your line about there being a lack of urgency. I hope that I demonstrated in my opening comments the amount of work that has been undertaken since the initial REC Committee report was published. Also, we cannot forget that, for a couple of years between then and now, there were the significant challenges of dealing with Covid and exiting the EU in the midst of everything.

However, it is important to remember that—touching on what I said previously—SEPA introduced its new framework in 2019, to help to guide farms towards higher dispersal locations. There is also the fact that, if there were a concern about waste removal, a licence would not be issued in the first place. When a licence is given to a business, it is given on the basis that the business operates within environmental limits.

SEPA is also working with developers who are focusing on innovations such as waste collection removal systems. SEPA has also implemented a new charging regime, to incentivise the use of those new technologies. It is important to recognise the work that has taken place and that is still on-going. All of the farms are due to be on the new framework by the end of this year.

We talk in the vision about the potential for sustainable growth of the industry within environmental limits. Earlier in the session, we touched on the monitoring that is undertaken, and the surveillance of that is very much part of the work that SEPA undertakes as part of its 2019 framework.

In relation to animal welfare in particular?

It is important to remember that any work has to be done within environmental limits, so all of that is modelled at the outset of the process, before any licences are given. However, I completely understand the importance of the point that you are raising.

It is not for me to set a target, because I am not an expert in that field and I cannot say how long that work would take. It is SEPA’s role to undertake that work, and I would expect it to do so as efficiently as possible. It outlined in its evidence to the committee why the process takes the length of time that it does, and there is nothing further we can add to that.

I will touch on a point that I made earlier. APHA is increasing its capacity in that area. If my understanding is right, it is adding a couple of members to its team, to ensure that it can undertake more work in that regard.