 Can we have the cabinet secretary's microphone please? Thank you. Many thanks Before the meeting, I would like to begin my reminder of day why we are discussing these matters. The world's ecosystems are rapidly degrading. This is not a remote or an abstract problem. It is real. It is happening now, and we cannot continue to ignore what is in front of us. The marine heat wave in The North Sea last week, which has been made extreme by scientists, Felly, rydw i'n credu cymdeithasol i ddoch yn yw'r effeithio ein bod yn fwy rwyf, a'r newid yn ymgyrch ar gyfer a'r ysgrifennu a'r cymdeithasol a'r gyfrif erbyn. Wrth gwrs, mae'n rydw i'n ddim yn teimlo i ddweud i ddodgymennu swyddiol o'r challenge, but at the same time we must do so via a fair and just transition, which empowers our people. Presiding Officer, I want to be clear why this Government believes change is required. The latest assessment under the UK marine strategy indicated that overall we have failed to achieve 11 out of the 15 indicators of good environmental status in our seas. Evidence presented in Scotland's 2020 marine assessment shows an accelerating rate of change due to human activities. Nine out of 21 marines regions in Scotland have sea floor habitats, which are predicted to be in poor condition across more than half of their area. Seabirds are also in trouble with populations of surface feeding seabirds such as the Kitty Walk in decline. Failure to safeguard and improve the resilience of Scotland's marine ecosystems to changing climate risks risks the very basis on which our marine industries and coastal communities are built. The case for enhanced marine protection therefore is clear and one that all parties in the chamber agree on or at least they did at election time. We know that where we protect our marine ecosystems we protect and we sustain the ecosystem services that livelihoods and communities rely on and that outcome is something that I hope we can all agree. That is why we are committed to working with coastal communities, with fishers, aquaculture, tourism and all affected sectors to enhance marine protection in Scotland for the benefit of all. There has understandably been considerable debate around highly protected marine areas and I should like to thank all members, stakeholders and members of the public who have contributed so robustly to the early part of this debate. My thanks also for the many constructive conversations that I have had with MSPs from across the chamber in recent weeks as well as with fishing representatives, local authorities, youth representatives and environmental campaigners. That includes my colleagues in the Scottish Greens. Highly protected marine areas are part of our bute house agreement and I very much welcome the constructive engagement that I have had with the green group as we have developed our thinking on this critical issue. I have listened intently and I am in no doubt of the strong views both for and against, but if there is one consistent point of consensus it is that doing nothing is not an option. In fact, we know from a recent Government-funded study that 85 per cent of Scottish respondents consider that protecting the marine environment is important to them. I want to emphasise that I recognise the scale of what highly protected marine areas represent. We are at the drawing board on this issue and I have from the very beginning of the process invited Scotland's communities to the drawing board with us. It is why I was keen that we consulted so broadly and so early in the process as possible with no predetermined ideas about sites. We are currently analysing the thousands of responses to that consultation and I will of course give due consideration to those. A full response to the consultation and the next steps will be published after summer recess. However, I committed in this chamber to updating the Parliament on the matter as soon as I possibly could. Ahead of a fuller update after summer, I should like to share an initial one today. A particular concern that has been raised with me by both those who support HPMA and those who do not is that the implementation of the proposal in the proposed timeframe could risk limiting our aspirations for genuine collaboration with communities, which, to me and to this Government, is absolutely integral to Scotland's approach to a fair and a just transition. Therefore, while, for reasons that I have stated, we firmly remain committed to the outcome of enhancing marine protection, I can confirm today that the proposal, as consulted on, will not be progressed. That means that we will no longer seek to implement HPMAs across 10 per cent of Scotland's seas by 2026. Over the summer, as part of on-going dialogue with all those who have an interest in Scotland's seas and protecting them, we will develop a new pathway and a timetable for our work. That will be in line with our draft biodiversity strategy and its ambition for Scotland to be nature positive by 2030. It recognises that the EU has proposed marine protection in at least 10 per cent, sorry, enhanced marine protection in at least 10 per cent of its seas by 2030. Importantly, I will ensure that communities across Scotland are central to this process. We know that there are a plethora of innovative ideas of how we can improve protection, and that is exactly what I want to hear more of, including from those such as inshore fishermen who recognise the importance of this to their livelihood. It is very important to me that those affected by policies are engaged in their development. The viability of coastal and island communities matters greatly to this Government, so too do matters of cultural importance that have come to the fore of this debate. As I have said a number of times, our seas must remain a source of economic and social prosperity for our nation. Therefore, I speak directly to everyone in our coastal and island communities, including those who have expressed concerns to date when I say that I want you to help shape the future of Scotland's seas. As I and indeed the First Minister have said many times, communities must be meaningfully involved, and today I am making clear that that will happen. In that regard, on an immediate and on-going basis, the Government does remain committed to supporting any group that wishes to pursue community-led marine protection in their local areas. We have already seen successful initiatives in Arran and in St Abs and Imouth. I will do everything that I can in this session of Parliament to support those communities who want to follow their shining examples—examples that we know can work to improve the state of the local marine environment. While I have confirmed today that the HBMA policy as consulted upon will not be taken forward, investing in ocean health requires a range of interventions across all of our seas that we must continue to take forward as a matter of urgency. Scotland's existing marine protected area network covers approximately 37 per cent of our seas, but individual sites must be effectively managed to achieve their objectives, and we must also do more to safeguard our particularly vulnerable species and habitats. We have an on-going programme of work to implement fisheries management measures in existing NPAs where they are yet to be introduced and to protect some of the most vulnerable priority marine features outside of the NPA network. Those measures were delayed by Brexit and the Covid-19 pandemic, but were committed to putting them in place as soon as possible following due process, and I welcome the fishing industry's support in moving that forward. I can confirm that, after summer recess, we will consult on proposals for fisheries management measures in offshore NPAs beyond 12 nautical miles. The options to be consulted upon have been the subject of extensive engagement and over many years with all stakeholders. Inshore NPAs and priority marine features also require fisheries management measures, however the complexity of the inshore and the number of sites has meant that progress has been slower than hoped. Therefore, consultation on inshore measures will take place in 2024. My colleague, Mary Gougeon, intends to consult this summer on the potential closure of sand eel fisheries in Scottish waters. That is a crucial step in safeguarding an important food source for many species and could aid the long-term sustainability and resilience of marine ecosystems. All that vital work, Presiding Officer, on marine protection must and will proceed with pace. Of course, it does so as the Government continues to support Scotland's fishing industry, not least through the £14 million marine fund Scotland that the Rural Affairs Secretary, Mary Gougeon, recently launched the third round of. I want to take the opportunity to thank all the stakeholders with whom I work across all those matters. I began this statement by outlining our commitment to addressing the twin crises of climate change and nature loss. Our blue economy vision recognises that our economy and society are embedded with nature. They are not external to it. It looks to move us beyond traditional narratives of choosing between ocean protection and production, recognising that the latter cannot be achieved without the former. I will be publishing more on next steps after the summer. Of course, we will keep Parliament up to date, but I hope that what I have stated today demonstrates that I am listening and that I will continue to listen. There has been a lot of heat in the debate about HPMAs and I hope that my commitment to develop a new pathway with all those who will join me around the table will allow a great deal less heat and more light in the matter. I am clear that both enhanced marine protection and a whole community approach are required. I said in my forward to the recent HPMA consultation that, I quote, I am determined that those who may be affected by those proposals are involved from the outset. That is why I want to hear what you think. I went on to say that I want to take on board your concerns and your ideas. While I continue my meetings across Scotland over the summer and as my officials and I finalise analysis of the consultation responses, I trust that it is clear that I am listening and that I will continue to listen as we take forward what is the imperative of marine protection. The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues raised in her statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for questions after which we will move on to the next item of business. I will be grateful of all members who wish to put a question where to press their request to speak buttons. Over the last few months, my Scottish Conservative colleagues and I have been engaging extensively with fishermen and the industry representatives across the length and the breadth of Scotland's coastal communities to hear their concerns. Never before in my role, as rural spokesperson for my party, have I come across a policy that is so universally opposed by an industry and by communities that industry supports. Today's statement has objectively failed to address the concerns of our industry. Instead of listening to fishing communities, they are rehashing their plans on what the EU tells them to do. Instead of backing down, this Government is doubling down on its plans to ban fishing in almost 50 per cent of Scottish waters. Same policy, new date, bute house fudge. Cabinet secretary, when will the Scottish Government finally listen to the concerns of the people they are supposed to serve and drop these community wrecking plans? I will leave it up to Rachel Hamilton, but I suspect that she will have to correct the record at some point on some of the assertions that she has just made. It is also deeply ironic and really disappointing that she is resorting to what is politicking. It is ironic, because, as I have said a number of times now, her party stood on a manifesto with a commitment to highly protected marine areas. Her colleagues in the UK Government are taking forward highly protected marine areas in England, and at Therese Coffey, the Environment Secretary, described highly protected marine areas as a vital way forward. I have been very clear from the beginning that this Government believes and is utterly convinced that we must take forward enhanced marine protection in Scotland's waters, but equally we are committed to doing so via a process that communities can have faith in and which represents fairness and justice, and that is exactly what we will continue to take forward. I welcome the statement, and I hope that it is a genuine change of heart and a signal of a very different working relationship with our fishing communities. The people whose lives depend on our seas are ideally placed to make policy that protects their marine environment. Can I ask what this new engagement will look like and how it will include all those affected by changes? Can she assure me that any changes to the management of existing marine protected areas will be carried out after full consultation with coastal communities? Will she assure the chamber that that is not simply HPMAs by the back door? Finally, if communities want to instigate areas of protection, how do they do that, given the process that has taken decades in the past? Rhoda Grant mentioned the relationship between the Scottish Government and the fishing industry. I would say that please do not be under any misapprehension that we have engaged on that issue in absence of others. Mary Gougeon and I, our officials, have a strong relationship with Scotland's fishing industry. We engage with them on a range of matters. We have been engaging with them on marine protection for a number of years, and I refer to that in my statement as regards to the NPA process. I thank them for that, and I thank Scotland's marine law equally. I am not going to pre-empt the outcome of the conversations that I am continuing to have over the summer, nor am I going to pre-empt the outcome of finalised consultation responses. I remain open-minded to what the new approach to community engagement will look like, but if Rhoda Grant has ideas on how she thinks that that can best be done, I would welcome them, as I would from others across the chamber. The news that the Government will not be seeking to progress the HPMA proposals represents a very welcome change of tack, which will be greeted with relief along the west coast. Fishers have more at stake than anyone in ensuring that our seas are sustainable, so what can the Government now do to ensure that fishing communities are at the heart of future fishing policy? Dr Allan is absolutely right that our marine sectors, including the fishing industry across the whole of the country, depend on a healthy marine environment, and of course fishers understand how important that is, and they must have their say. I want the voices from coastal and island communities to shape their own future for their benefit. As I have mentioned, I intend to establish a dialogue on the benefits of enhancing marine protection that allows that to happen. It must be a democratic process, and it must reflect the scale of the ambition of protecting Scotland's seas in the way that the nature crisis demands of us. I take the opportunity to thank Dr Allan for his engagement with me on the issue, including his setting up of a helpful meeting between me, him and the representatives of Western Isles Council. I was minded to welcome the apparent scrapping of HPMAs, but that statement is no more than a last-minute effort to pacify the rebels on their back benches as they head off in their summer holidays, because that statement still continues to mention the unresearched, arbitrary 10 per cent target. Will the minister apologise to her fishers in coastal communities for the worry and distress that she has caused them over the past few months? Will she join me in condemning the green MSP, Ross Greer, on his ridiculous attack on the Scottish Fishermen's Federation in Salmond, Scotland, or is his voice the true voice of the green SNP unholy alliance and their misguided policies, which only outcome would be their own version of the rural islands and highland clearances? I have always and I hope that my conduct and my contributions on this matter in the chamber have demonstrated how seriously I take this matter. I understand both the absolute imperative of enhancing the protection of our oceans but equally doing so in a way that is acceptable to and works for and benefits the people who live in our coastal and island communities throughout Scotland. I take that exceptionally seriously and just regardless of politicking from the Conservatives, I will continue to do that. This goes to the core of the issue. We are in an emergency situation with the climate and nature degradation and as the Antonio Guterres, the UN Secretary General says, what that requires of us is everything everywhere all at once. That is the challenge that we as a Government have in Scotland. I am dedicated to doing that but I am also dedicated to fairness and I hope that what I have set out today makes that clear. Kenneth Gibson, to be followed by Mercedes-Benz. It is disappointing that for some members no compromise on this issue appears to be acceptable. Enhancing marine protection will safeguard invaluable marine habitats and key fish stocks, specifically by curtailing the most destructive human activities such as scallop dredging and bottom trawling. What steps will the cabinet secretary take to engage with communities who wish to strengthen marine biodiversity, emulate the success of Lum Lash Bay, no take zone in my constituency and provide further protection for Scotland's inshore waters and over what timescale will that take place? Kenneth Gibson for his question and also what has been a very robust support from him for proposals for enhanced marine protection, and I will continue to liaise with him on his views on the matter. Of course, he represents an area in which we have an excellent example within Scotland of what community-led marine protection can look like. The Lum Lash Bay no take zone shows us the benefits that can be had for both the marine environment and for the people who rely on it. I was very pleased to visit coast recently and to help launch their new explorer vessel. They are a true example of environmental protection and community empowerment, and their example is something that I will take into the next stages of developing this process. As with my response to Rhoda Grant, I cannot pre-empt the outcome of my consultation analysis or indeed the conversations that I am keeping having over summer, but I will, as I have done today, seek to update Parliament as soon as I can on the pathway forward. Mercedes Gael but to be followed by Emma Harper. The status quo in Scotland's waters is not working. Last week, the court of session ruled that ministers unlawfully ignored the national marine plan when deciding on fishing licence policies. After today's statement, it is clear that we are still no closer to a coherent marine spatial planning process. In the meantime, our waters and everyone and everything that rely on them are being squeezed. Can the minister confirm whether the Scottish Government is committed to creating a cohesive spatial plan for our seas in this term of the Parliament? There appears to be a real conflict in the Scottish Labour position here whereby Mercedes Gael seems to reflect and remember the manifesto that she stood on that committed not to 10 per cent HPMA, as we have consulted on, but on double that, whereas a colleague sitting right to her left seems to have forgotten that entirely. I mentioned in my statement the suite of other actions that we will continue to take forward, not least management measures within the NPA network, not least protection of priority marine features and our work on sand eel fishery. I hope that some of the space that the statement will create in the marine protection areas will allow us to progress those matters. She mentioned the shared space and the need to manage that. We have begun in the very early days of the next national marine plan, and I would expect that some of those matters of shared space and how best to do that will feature heavily in the development of that plan. Emma Harper, to be followed by Liam McArthur. I welcome this announcement, which will certainly alleviate galloway fishers' concerns and which will be welcomed by fishing communities across the freezing galloway. As the Scottish Government continues its plans to enhance marine protections for the environment, can the cabinet secretary reiterate how the voices of fishers such as those in galloway are at the centre of those discussions and can she confirm that she will meet with the galloway fishers at our earliest opportunity so that their voices can be heard from the outset of any future proposals? The genesis of what I am saying today is that I intend to take the time to gather views from people across Scotland about how we improve the state of our marine environment in a way that ensures that we rise to what is required of us by way of conservation but equally in a way that serves Scotland's people. I know that there are innovative ideas out there about how we do that and it is exactly what I want to hear more of, including from those who Emma Harper represents. I am just finalising the meetings that I am seeking to take forward over the summer and I will certainly consider her approach regarding the galloway fisher people. Liam McArthur, to be followed by Ruth Maguire. Thank you. Like Alasdair Allan, I warmly welcome the Government's retreat from the arbitrary approach to HPMAs, which is a real alarm in the island communities that we represent. Of course, fishers recognise the importance of marine protection but, given that less than 10% of the existing NPA network has been monitored over the past five years, how does the cabinet secretary plan to resource the monitoring and management of NPAs and can she say more about the way in which the engagement with island and coastal communities will take place? I thank Liam McArthur for his question. Although I have to give my view that 10% is not an arbitrary figure, 10% mirrors the level of strict protection that the EU is currently seeking to develop. I think that France, Germany and Denmark are equally looking at strict protection of 10%. I understand and I tried to set out in my statement that it was the coincidence of an ambitious 10% within the timeframe that both those who opposed HPMAs and those who supported HPMAs were telling me that they worried limited the opportunity for the robust community engagement that I certainly want to see and, of course, they do as well. That is exactly that. Another question about moving forward with the NPA network, as he says, is exactly what I am taking into a dialogue over the summer and will update Parliament on the fuller details of that once I have decided on the way forward. Last week, I met my constituent Willie Kennedy, who is chair of the Scottish Sea Angling Conservation Network. He painted a pretty distressing picture of the decline of our inshore waters of the Clyde due to destructive trawling since the removal of the three-mile limit in 1984 and spoke to the desire of his organisation for robust protection measures and a just transition for the Clyde fleet. Can I ask the cabinet secretary how enhanced marine protection can support the recovery of the Clyde seabed and the protection and promotion of the interests of our local communities, sea anglers and the low-impact commercial fishing sector? I thank Ruth Maguire for her question, and whilst I might be hearing cries of nonsense from the Tory benches, in fact, it is scientific evidence from temperate locations around the world that suggests that enhanced marine protection delivers that greater conservation. Cabinet secretary, if you could give me a moment. Mr Carson, I can hear you rather too clearly, and I'd be grateful if you could allow the cabinet secretary to respond. I was going to briefly go on to say that it can lead to a wider range of sea floor species, larger populations and increased resilience to disturbance. We have studies that show this from around the world, including in California and in New Zealand, and in particular the benefits of spillover from highly protected areas, where, of course, greater species abundance in and around highly protected marine areas is quite clearly advantageous to those who make their living from the seas. I have mentioned studies such as Llanlash Bay, but they have shown that those commercially important species such as the King Scallop and the Lobster are more numerous, they are older, and they are larger following protection. If I can have one message from today's update, it is that the position that was consulted on is no longer being progressed, but this Government goes into our conversation about the process with a very clear principle that enhanced marine protection is required and will be implemented. I welcome the constructive approach that is being taken to protecting our marine environment and fish stocks for current and future generations. The new timeframe will allow genuine partnership working with communities to deliver enhanced protection and help us to align with the EU. In the meantime, community-led marine reserves, as we have been hearing already today, like Llanlash Bay, could lead the way. What will the cabinet secretary do to encourage more coastal communities to come forward and ensure that all voices are heard, such as those working in tourism, conservation and young people, as well as all parts of the fishing industry? I think that she has touched on a point about how willing communities feel able to come forward. I said that I thought that there had been more heat than light in this debate. I think that there has been. There is a toxicity that has surrounded it. I hope that today I am creating the breathing space for us all to come back round the table, everybody who is interested to come back round the table and to find a way forward. My point regarding encouraging communities to come forward is that I think that, amid the toxicity, there was a reluctance among those who probably supported or would like to see one in their communities. They maybe did not feel that they could come forward. I want to take the heat out of this debate. I want to involve everybody with an interest. I will encourage and support any community that wants to follow the Llanlash example and seek to develop this locally. I would like to remind the chamber of my register of interests that I am a joint proprietor of a inshaw fishery for migratory fish. This statement today is partially about protection. It is also a huge amount about deflection, political deflection, because, only this morning, I was told and reminded that this HPMA process has created confusion and anger across all coastal communities, a lack of transparency and accountability, which featured, as part of the recent quarter of session, ruling on inshaw fisheries and fishing licenses. My question to the cabinet secretary is simple. The rec committee in 2018, recommendation 53, recommended moving salmon farms from inshaw areas further out to sea to ensure that they did less damage to the coast. Will she ensure that that is part of the process and that she does not forget that when she is taking this process forward? Political deflection is all that we get from the Conservatives, I am afraid. To come on to the point that Edward Mountain raises, the cabinet secretary for rural affairs and I are taking forward work on some of the points that he raises and the aquaculture generally through our Scottish Aquaculture Council, which is proving to be an excellent forum to discuss and to exchange many ideas and proposals around the sustainable future of aquaculture for Scotland. It will continue to do that. Equally, this is a process that I want to bring everyone around the table on. That includes Edward Mountain and MSPs from across the chamber. If he has ideas about changes to the aquaculture industry in Scotland, he is always welcome to bring them to me, to Mary Gougeon, or indeed to be part of the dialogue on the future of HMPAs. I thank the cabinet secretary for her constructive dialogue that we have had and for taking the time to listen to the concerns of the coastal communities and the fishers that I represent. Fishers are well aware of the need to safeguard the health of our seas because not just do they rely on that for their livelihoods but also for our food security. They bring intergenerational knowledge and experience to the table. Can I ask the cabinet secretary how fishers will be able to feed the swath of knowledge into any future discussions on enhancing marine protections as we continue to protect our marine environment along with our world-renowned vital food source? Co-management is at the heart of how we manage fisheries in Scotland, and it will be, as I hope I have made clear today, part of how we take forward a pathway on enhanced marine protection. Equally, fishermen can feed into discussions through established forums on the generality of marine matters in Scotland, including through the fisheries management and conservation group. I mentioned previously in a previous answer that the cabinet secretary for rural fairs and I and our officials, we work with the fishing industry regularly that the Scottish Government has done so for years on quota, on financial support, indeed emotional support in difficult times and on marine protection through the NPA network. Interestingly, one of the things that has been raised with me in this process is that there is a great deal of faith in the NPA process and the means by which management measures are taken forward through that. So we are ever learning that this is an iterative process. That is what we are facing as we try to live up to what the climate and nature emergency demands of us. In claiming to take our plans back to the drawing board, the cabinet secretary now says that there will be dialogue with marine stakeholders and that communities will be central to that process. Presiding Officer, I'm at loss to know why that wasn't the approach from the very start of this, but the cabinet secretary said that HPMAs was part of the Bute House agreement and so will she be honest with this chamber? Is this a genuine U-turn from the Scottish Government, albeit one-forced by anger in local communities opposition from across this chamber and the threat of rebellion in the SNP-backed benches? Given the green seem to be happy with this new approach, is this just a sleight of hand and Scotland's coastal communities and our fishing communities still have a lot to be worried about about this SNP-green Government's intentions? This is not as is characterised by Jamie Halcro Johnston because I have been clear from the start that I always understood the ambition that was represented in our proposals. That's why the Government was clear from the beginning that we wanted to hear views, we wanted to have Scotland's communities, industry, local authorities help us shape the process by which we deliver enhanced marine protection. I'm glad that Jamie Halcro Johnston has given me the opportunity to demonstrate just how much engagement has already been part of the development of this process. Not least that early and broad consultation, but we held some 20 meetings with stakeholders— Cabinet secretary, Mr Halcro Johnston, you have put your question. I'd be grateful if the cabinet secretary could respond. Thanks, Presiding Officer. Some 20 meetings with key stakeholders in advance of consulting to take their views on what could be involved. We held meetings during the consultation principally to assist anybody who wanted to complete it to do so. Since closing, I have discussed matters in Trun with fishing representatives. I have discussed matters with the Western Isles Council representatives. I've met the community of coast in Arran. I have spoken with the Scottish Fisherman's Federation, I have met with Environment Link and I've met with representatives of the Sustainable Ensure Fisheries Trust. I will continue to engage with the spectrum of interests in this matter as we deliver the imperative of marine protection. Thank you. That concludes the ministerial statement. There will be a brief pause before we move to the next item of business.