Fishing Industry: Government Support

Seamus Logan Excerpts

Wednesday 1st July 2026 Westminster Hall

[Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered Government support for the fishing industry.

It is always a pleasure to serve under you, Sir Alec. The rich fishing and coastal heritage of my constituency of Aberdeenshire North and Moray East is second to none. My constituency is home to Europe’s largest whitefish port at Peterhead and Europe’s largest shellfish port at Fraserburgh—the largest is not Bridlington, as some people claim. My constituency’s corner of the north-east of Scotland is a key part of our nation’s fishing industry, and a significant part of the industry in these islands.

That is why I was so keen to invite the Minister’s colleague—the former Minister of State at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the hon. Member for Wallasey (Dame Angela Eagle)—to Scotland and to extend that invitation to my constituency. I hope that you, too, can accept that invitation when your diary allows, so you can then see this historic industry with your own eyes and meet the experts who nurture and maintain it against myriad challenges during these volatile geopolitical and economic times. I hope, too, that such a visit will be valuable in understanding why there is such disappointment and anger at how the fishing and coastal growth fund has been allocated in Scotland, which has less than 8% of it—£28 million out of a £360 million pot.

Let us put things into perspective. The Scottish fishing sector represents over 60% of the UK’s total fishing capacity, contributes over 60% of the UK’s seafood exports and lands more than 75% of all UK quota species. If the right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham), otherwise known as the presumptive Prime Minister, is really serious about the devolution of power and decision making, seeing growth in every postcode and putting hope in every heart, let him look at this issue. Let him listen to Councillor Ann Bell, chair of the North East Scotland Fisheries Development Partnership, when she says:

“A fair allocation would, at minimum, be consistent with the 46% share Scotland previously received”

from European Union funds.

Why is there still so much anger about all this in Scotland and in my constituency? Because this Westminster Government tried to blame the Scottish Government for the Barnettisation of the fund. So we submitted a freedom of information request asking the Scotland Office to show us where in its discussions that had been asked for. This is what we got—and I have six pages of this.

[Sir Alec Shelbrooke (in the Chair)]

Order. I gently remind the hon. Member, first, that we do not use the word “you”—I am not responsible for any of this. You speak through the Chair so that we can maintain calmness in the Chamber. Secondly, you are not allowed to use aids and props. You may describe the aid or prop, but please do not hold it up as if it will be recognised.

--- Later in debate ---

[Seamus Logan]

Thank you for that clarification, Chair. I have six pages of almost entirely redacted correspondence, so it is clear that somebody does not want us to see these things.

In subsequent correspondence between the Scotland Office and the chair of the Scottish White Fish Producers Association, it is admitted that this was a Treasury decision in 2024, not a Scottish Government decision. It is admitted that the allocation in no way reflects the size and strength of the industry in the north-east of Scotland, but the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland says she is too busy to meet the chair of the SWFPA, Jimmy Buchan—too busy. Perhaps in the forthcoming reshuffle she might find herself less busy.

Adding insult to injury, allocating this paltry pocket money to Scotland over 12 years means that Scotland will receive only around £2.3 million per year in additional investment. To say that that falls short of what is needed is to put it mildly. If the UK Government had engaged fully with the industry in Scotland, as well as with the Scottish Government, they might have been made more aware of that. The Minister here today now has the opportunity to put this right.

Another expert in the industry, Mike Park, chief executive of the Scottish White Fish Producers Association, has also called the allocation unfair and indefensible. He adds:

“Scottish waters are bearing the brunt of the 12-year EU fisheries access extension”,

which was negotiated by the UK Government, and that

“the use of the population-based Barnett formula fails to reflect this reality…with communities left carrying the burden with only a fraction of the support they deserve.”

This is not about tribal politics; nor it is about scoring points in this Chamber. This is about fairness and the lack of it in terms of support for our fishing industry in Scotland.

I was pleased to note the excellent Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee’s report, “Resetting the relationship with fishing communities”, which was critical of how the fund had been allocated and recommended that the UK Government should work collaboratively with the devolved Governments on the design and allocation of the fund to ensure consistency and fairness across the sector for the allocations in year 2.

In common with my colleagues on the all-party parliamentary group on fisheries, I look forward to the forthcoming sectoral action plan being co-ordinated by the former Minister of State at DEFRA, the hon. Member for Cambridge (Daniel Zeichner). I would like to add my own recommendation that the ideal way to ensure better engagement in Scotland would be to support reinstating the Scottish Seafood Industry Action Group, as suggested by former Scottish Government Fishing Minister Mairi Gougeon, something which the Scotland Office endorsed. Collaboration with those in this sector will be invaluable in resetting relationships and an opportunity to understand a further pressing problem on how one size most definitely does not fit all when it comes to fishing’s labour shortages.

That brings me to the UK Government’s reluctance to have a Scottish bespoke visa for our catching and processing sector. Fishing in the north-east is affected by major labour shortages. The knock-on impact to growth and building a successful and prosperous future is very negative. I am currently in an unsatisfactory game of email ping-pong with the Department for Work and Pensions about its insistence that skilling up domestic labour is the answer to these shortages.

Let me share some reality with the DWP and the Home Office. The north-east fishing industry cannot get local people to apply for these posts or, when they do, to stay in post for more than one shift, despite strong financial and career incentives. The flip side is that international workers are commonly keener to stay the distance once they are trained up—a costly endeavour for already stretched businesses. This is not just a Scottish issue; just ask my colleagues from other parties. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) knows exactly what I am speaking about in relation to Northern Ireland.

On another front, Ian Gatt, the chief executive of the Scottish Pelagic Fishermen’s Association points out that the ongoing situation with quota shares of mackerel between coastal states is yet to be resolved, despite efforts by UK and Scottish Governments to secure an agreement with the four coastal states. That is crucial, because mackerel is the most valuable to Scottish fisheries in terms of tonnage. The autumn negotiations are therefore crucial for Scotland.

All those issues point to the need for the UK Government to play a far more supportive role with the Scottish fishing industry. To do that, they need to listen to industry concerns, rebuild trust and boost economic growth, and they need to do so with policies that rise to the challenges outlined and that reflect solutions to the realities that they face. It is just not good enough to bypass the sector, override the Scottish Government and play funding games with invaluable investment. The time for a more positive reset is well past due.

The Scottish Government’s support for our fishing industry is extensive. Since the launch of marine fund Scotland, £70 million has been awarded to almost 400 projects across Scotland, enabling total investment of £154 million—everything from supporting new entrants, the onboard observers programme, the promotion of Scottish seafood, safety training, covid-19 recovery funding for 855 vessels, emergency harbour repairs and much more. Targeted economic link measures have, for example, led to an additional £58 million-worth of mackerel and herring being landed in Scotland, helping to drive record landed values at Peterhead port. There is much more to be done, not least in terms of harbour renewal and expansion at Fraserburgh and Peterhead. Those are the kinds of capital projects that need co-operation between our two Governments in the interests of both Scotland and the UK.

I should be grateful if the Minister could address the following four questions, either in his closing remarks or in correspondence at a later date. First, can our fish processing industry colleagues be included in the energy-intensive industry scheme? The former Minister, the hon. Member for Wallasey (Dame Angela Eagle), was pressing hard on that point; I lobbied her strongly on it, and she understood. Secondly, does the Minister understand that the current Home Office approach to immigration is creating unintended consequences for our fishing industry, and will he lobby for a bespoke visa scheme that provides solutions, not problems?

Thirdly, can the Minister reassure the Scottish industry that the European Union will not use the forthcoming sanitary and phytosanitary agreement to place further burdens on our fishers, but will in fact reduce the burden, making it easier to export?

[Douglas Lumsden (Aberdeen South) (Con)]

I completely agree that the funding settlement is inadequate and unfair for Scottish fishermen, but will the hon. Member confirm that the SNP policy is to rejoin the EU and then rejoin the hated common fisheries policy?

[Seamus Logan]

I have no brief to speak on behalf of the Scottish Government. Of course, our policy is very clear: we want to rejoin the European Union, because Brexit has been a disaster for the Scottish economy. However, I do not believe that we want any of the worst effects of the common fisheries policy.

Finally, can the Minister support the re-establishment of the Scottish seafood industry action group and actively investigate doing so?

--- Later in debate ---

[Seamus Logan]

It was remiss of me not to welcome the Minister to his place earlier, and I formally do so now. I thank everyone who has contributed to the debate. We have had a small number of speakers, but it is not about volume; it is about quality. There were lots of references to broken promises; there have been too many broken promises, I am afraid, but let us hope that the future will result in promises kept, and I wish the Minister well in his endeavours in that regard.

The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Bridgwater (Sir Ashley Fox), asked some very searching questions; I agree with him that we need to know what outcomes will flow from the fishing and coastal growth fund. I was particularly interested in the Minister’s reply to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) in relation to immigration, and it sounds very much as if there might be some productive dialogue in the future—let us hope so. I was also very heartened to hear that the hon. Gentleman takes great pride in this industry and that he has a heritage there to draw on; that is wonderful. I endorse the remarks that were made about the impact of fuel costs on the industry and about the dangers that our fishermen and women face when they go to sea—it is a very dangerous occupation.

Finally, I want to take issue with one part of the excellent contribution from my hon. Friend the Member for Arbroath and Broughty Ferry (Lara Bird): she claimed to have the best fish and chip shop in the world in her constituency. Many Members in Westminster Hall and the main Chamber will have laid claim to that title, but I assure her that there are many fish and chip shops in my constituency that believe they have that title, not least Findlay’s in Fraserburgh.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered Government support for the fishing industry.