Orkney council’s response to plans to impose fishing bans has been branded a “knee-jerk backwards step”.
Earlier this week, the council’s Policy and Resources committee met to discuss the Scottish Government’s controversial early proposals for Highly Protected Marine Areas (HPMAs).
Ultimately, the majority of councillors decided not to use the consultation response prepared by the local authority’s officers. Instead, they submitted a response opposing any proposals with negative social or economic effects for the islands.
Following the decision, Orkney councillor Kristopher Leask has called the consultation submission that has been submitted “deeply disappointing.”
‘Deeply disappointing’
He has also described it as “hollow and combative.”
The Scottish Government is proposing to have at least 10% of Scottish waters declared HPMAs. It is expected they’ll decide which areas in 2026.
HPMAs would be kept free from activities such as fishing and aquaculture in favour of protecting the marine environment.
During the April 18 meeting, councillors stated their concerns over the proposal. Mellissa Thomson said HPMAs could have a “devastating effect” on the county.
With proposals at an early stage, Mr Leask suggested councillors keep level heads at this point. He proposed that they submit the response prepared by council officers.
However, he was in the minority, as after two votes on the matter a consultation response to the HPMAs proposed by councillors Lindsay Hall and David Dawson was adopted by the majority.
During the meeting Mr Leask asked why the amended consultation response had removed two-and-a-half pages outlining the position of aquaculture and tidal.
He said this was replaced with a “re-hashed policy position”.
Mr Dawson put this down to insufficient time to debate the issue in its entirety. Orkney council had been behind in its submission to the Scottish Government, missing the deadline and asking for an extension.
Orkney should join other islands groups in opposing proposals Dawson said
Outlining his position earlier in the meeting, councillor Dawson stated his “severe reservations” about HPMAs.
He said: “We as a council have not had an opportunity to even discuss with officers or with our communities.
“We’re now beyond the eleventh hour and we have to submit our response. I accept the response is measured but I don’t think it’s robust enough.
“We have to join our colleagues in Shetland and Western Isles in opposing this.”
Mr Leask spoke to the LDR service shortly after Tuesday’s debate on Highly Protected Marine Areas.
He said: “This outcome does no one working in the marine space in Orkney any favours. It is a knee-jerk backwards step for OIC marine policy,
“Cllrs Hall and Dawson’s amendment removed the two-and-a-half pages of red lines, context, policy positions we hoped to engage with the government on.
“Furthermore it removes any mention of fishers, aquaculture, and marine energy.
“Instead they opted for a hollow and combative consultation response. This will only turn those we need to engage on behalf of our local sectors against us.
Response weakens council’s ability to engage with government claims Leask
“The very people they sought to support are nowhere to be found in our key contribution to how HPMA’s should be taken forward.
He added: “The outcome of the meeting is deeply disappointing and significantly weakens OIC’s ability to engage with the government on HPMAs, and removes the critical support we need to push for the local sectors who will be affected.
“I thank those councillors who supported Cllr Shearer and I – and then Cllrs Stevenson and King. We each argued for a considered grown-up approach to engagement on such a critical and complex issue.”
Speaking today councillor Dawson said it was important that Scotland’s three islands groups “sing from the same hymn sheet” on the issue.
Mr Dawson stressed that it was the majority of councillors that agreed on the consultation response, which had to be firm and robust.
Conversation