teulu которуюd maes i Meidional, ond yn allu、 dweud Hulton. Ysgolch dyma ar gyfer yr ordannu a 멤� Ellini ac iel y maes i g prisio nhw nhw ein dweud oion i gŷn o gymortheitig. Y cifically pethol mae Royal Ramsay pan yw mae'r llwostatihau yng ngy Ontoryau o B ABC. fledg. I'm pleased to open the debate on the Harbour Scotland bill, and I'd like to thank those who submitted evidence and the convener and members of the Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee for the detailed scrutiny of the bill at stage 1. I welcome the committee's support for the general principles of the bill, and for their The overwhelming support for the bill is evidenced by the written and oral evidence received in which is referenced in the committees report Before the bill was introduced, we held stakeholder consultations brought with the key stakeholder groups including Britain's Ports Association, the United Kingdom Major Ports Group and UK Chamber of Shipping. No issues were raised in relation to the primary purpose of the bill. ond brydeu'r lawythiau, trying to support it as a trust port sector in Scotland. We consulted on two further proposals for the bill, including the introduction of a mediation step in section 31 of the Harbers Act 1964, which allows users to challenge harbour dues through appeal to ministers. However, the consensus from stakeholders was that legislation was not required and that the amendment could be achieved through non-statutre guidance. Transport Scotland is already progressing this work and will engage with the industry shortly on the details of that. We also consulted on removing the requirement of six copies of a draft harbour revision or empowerment order submitted along with the application of the order. In addition, it removes the requirement to submit six copies of a harbour reorganisation scheme. Necessary, I am sure, will all agree. If modern technology, the submission of multiple paper copies is no longer necessary, it will conserve resources, reduce the impact in the environment and reduce the bureaucratic burden of the application process itself. Scotland has a thriving port sector that makes a major contribution to Scotland's national and local economies. Our ports are continually investing in their infrastructure and their services to meet the demands of current and future markets. As recently published in Scotland, a specific version of the Oxford economic study shows that the maritime sector in Scotland provides 35,600 direct jobs, with approximately one in every four people employed by the maritime services sector in the UK, based in Scotland, making nearly twice as many people employed in Scotland than any other part of the UK. It has contributed £1.8 billion to the Scottish economy in 2013, accounting for an estimated 1.7 per cent of the country's total economic benefit and generated over £630 million in tax revenue. Impressive figures in our country would not be the country it is today without the day-to-day traffic through our ports, with more than 90 per cent of all goods being imported to the UK, still passing through the country's ports. In Scotland, we have three types of ports, all of which work in this environment. We have the private ports, for example, our fourth ports in Clydeport, local authority ports, such as Cillanville and Shetland in Campbelltown, and trust ports. However, the primary purpose of the bill relates to trust ports. Trust ports are independent statutory bodies, governed by their own local legislation and run by independent boards, who manage the assets of the trust for the benefit of stakeholders. All ports are obliged to act in accordance with their local legislation and other relevant law, whether they are trusts, private or local authority-owned. In the case of trust ports, they are generally creatures of statute and operate only within the powers and duties that are conferred on them by statute. Trust ports operate in a commercial environment, with no direct public funding, and compete in the market with private and local authority ports, as well as other trust ports. There are no shareholders or owners and profits are reinvested in the port. They make significant contributions to both local and, in many cases, the national economy. Trust ports in Scotland range in size from Aberdeen to the small yet thriving harbour of White Hills. All the surplices from harbour operations are reinvested for the benefit of the harbour as a whole and allow the trust to reinvest in major projects, for example. Existing legislation gives Scottish ministers the power to compel trust ports over the relevant turnover threshold, currently around £9 million, to bring forward privatisation proposals. That is a power that we have not used since devolution and is not a power that any Government would envisage using, even one in which I would probably be at a member. The existence of that power, however, is interpreted by the Office for National Statistics, onS, giving a degree of public control. It is such when a trust port reaches relevant turnover threshold, onS will reclassify them as public corporations. My predecessor, Keith Brown, wrote to onS in September 2013 to advise that Scottish ministers had no intention of exercising the power and that we would consider the introduction of legislation to remove it if necessary to avoid reclassification of those ports affected. Following OnS's decision of 25 September 2013 to retain the classification, Mr Brown made a commitment to take forward legislation to remove that power. OnS has indicated that the power to force privatisation is a key trigger for the reclassification, and it is a strong view by removing that power should address that. Although that was a decision in principle, OnS advised that it would only make a decision on that once the bill process was clear. My officials are currently in discussions with OnS and HM Treasury, and we expect their formal decision to be made by stage 2 of the bill. Currently, only one port in Scotland is classified as a public corporation, and that is Aberdeen. There are, however, two further ports that have reached the threshold. OnS has delayed the classification of those ports pending the outcome of the bill. In terms of Aberdeen harbour, that has not been an issue as since classification is a public corporation in 2000, it has been able to fund any infrastructure developments improvements from its own reserves. Aberdeen is, however, taking forward proposals for a port extension in Nygbe, a project that is designated as national development in NPF 3, and requiring an investment of around £300 million, which could involve a significant amount of borrowing. Classification as a public corporation means that any borrowings by the affected harbours will score upon the budgets of Scottish Government's budgets, despite the fact that it has no control over what is a private financial transaction. In terms of Aberdeen borrowings of £300 million, it would mean a significant impact on the Scottish Government's accounts. Although that is primarily a technical matter, it needs to be resolved so that it does not have an impact on the Government's ability to borrow and spend. The primary purpose of the bill will affect the repeal of section 10 of the Ports Act 1991, as it extends to Scotland. That will remove ministers' power to compel trust ports over the relevant turnover threshold to bring forward privatisation proposals. Trust ports fully support the bill in this regard, but more fundamentally the bill will remove a level of uncertainty for those ports affected and thus confirm minister support for the trust port model as part of the diverse range of ports ownership structures that are already operating in Scotland. Diversity in Scottish ports is considered one of its strengths, and by the range of developments taking place across our ports, Aberdeen, Lyric and Peterhead to name a few prime examples of on-going investment in port infrastructure under the trust port model. We considered alternatives to bringing forward legislation, the main one being, to seek HM Treasury cover to allow the classification to the budget to be neutral from a Scottish Government perspective. However, the risks associated with that included HM Treasury failing to accept the Scottish Government's case for any of the trust ports in any given financial year and the variation of borrowing versus the Treasury budget cover, i.e. the trust borrow more than the established level of HM Treasury budget cover for whatever reason. Those risks were considered significant and therefore not pursued. The ICI committee has recommended that the Parliament agrees to the general principles of the bill and therefore moved that the Parliament agrees to the general principles of the Harbors Scotland bill. I now call on Jim Eadie to speak on behalf of the infrastructure and capital investment committee. Mr Eadie, you have seven minutes, please. I am grateful for this opportunity to speak on behalf of the infrastructure and capital investment committee as the lead committee in scrutinising the Harbors Scotland bill. Given broad support for the proposals contained within the bill during both the Scottish Governments and the committee's consultations and the fact that there is a clear consensus in support of the bill's provisions across the chamber, it is fair to say that the bill will not be held below the waterline this afternoon. However, we can still expect a good deal of depth to our debate. Moving on to the key issues, the committee welcomes the aims of the bill, which the Scottish Government states is to provide an improved legislative framework for trust ports across Scotland and increase the efficiency and effectiveness of existing procedures and processes for stakeholders. There was close to unanimous stakeholder support for the measures in the bill during the Government's consultation, and that support was also replicated in written evidence to the committee. In view of that, the committee decided to restrict its oral evidence sessions hearing only from the Minister for Transport and Islands and the bill team. The committee expresses its gratitude to all those who provided their views in written and oral evidence. The main driving force behind the bill is to remove a power that exists whereby Scottish ministers can enforce the privatisation of trust ports with an annual turnover of £9 million, a power that has led the Office for National Statistics to classify those trust ports as public corporations. That is despite acknowledging that trust ports operate in a commercial environment, have no direct public funding and, despite assurances from the Scottish Government, that the power had not been used since devolution and that it had no intention of using that power. At the point of the committee's scrutiny, trust ports affected were Aberdeen Harbour, Lerwick Port Authority and Peterhead Port Authority. Of those, the O&S already classifies Aberdeen Harbour as a public body. However, it has postponed classification of Lerwick and Peterhead pending confirmation of the Scottish Government's legislative proposals as set out in this bill. Classifying those trust ports as public corporations means that any borrowing undertaken by the affected ports could have an impact on the Scottish Government's accounts and its own borrowing. The Scottish Government therefore hopes that removal of that power will encourage the O&S to reverse that decision and the subsequent budgetary impact. The Scottish Government has reiterated that removal of those powers would remove uncertainty for ports affected and reaffirm its support for the trust port model as part of the diverse range of ownership structures in Scotland. All those who responded to the committee's consultation agreed with the proposals. For example, the British Port Association stated, and I quote, "...to enable growth and development, trust ports should have the ability to borrow money commercially without causing budgetary issues for transport Scotland." As section 10 is one of the triggers for this classification, its removal could therefore take them out of this classification and clarify its financial status. That is a fundamental problem to which we hope that the bill will contribute a solution. The committee was assured by the Scottish Government that, although it had not had a guarantee from the O&S that it would indeed reverse its decision following the passage of the bill, its discussions with the O&S have suggested that it should satisfy its requirements with regard to reclassification. The Scottish Government confirmed to the committee that it expects that such discussions will be concluded by stage 2 of the bill and, in our report, we have asked to be kept informed on the outcome of those discussions. On behalf of the committee, I welcome the Government's commitment to doing so in its response to the committee yesterday. The Scottish Government also confirmed that the requirement to reclassify the affected trust ports is particularly important, as we have already heard this afternoon, given that Aberdeen Harbour is considering a large redevelopment that could involve significant borrowing, possibly in the region of £300 million. Should the reclassification not be forthcoming, then this borrowing could score against the Scottish Government's budget. Given that and any potential for future investments at eligible ports, the committee has called on the Scottish Government to provide further information on contingencies that it will put in place, given that the O&S has not, as yet, provided a guarantee of its final decision on those matters. The bill also removes an administrative requirement for six copies of a draft harbour revision or empowerment order to be submitted along with the application for the order. In addition, it reduces the requirement to submit six copies of a harbour reorganisation scheme to Scottish ministers seeking confirmation of the scheme to one copy. The committee, along with all stakeholders who responded, agreed that this was a sensible step, given that modern technology prevents the requirement for multiple paper copies. On behalf of the committee, I also welcome the Scottish Government's commitment in its response yesterday to update the committee on the development of non-statutory guidance on harbour dues mediation. In closing, the infrastructure and capital investment committee considers that this bill brings forward proportionate and appropriate provisions to address a very specific policy objective, as outlined in the explanatory notes to the bill, namely that of ensuring that the borrowings by the trust ports that meet the current criteria do not score as expenditure against Scottish Government budgets in the year of borrowing. The committee looks forward to the Government's response to the information requested in its report and recommends that the Parliament agrees the general principles of the bill. I now call on Mary Fee. Seven minutes are thereby, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I start my contribution by confirming that Scottish Labour will support the Government throughout the passage of the Harbour Scotland Bill, and I am happy to work in any way that I can with the Minister to progress this piece of legislation. There is nothing that we cannot want to disagree with in respect of the legislation, and we welcome the moves by the Scottish Government in its attempts to prevent specified trust ports being privatised. By removing the powers of Scottish ministers to require trust ports to prepare privatisation proposals, the Scottish Government is putting the stakeholders of each harbour first, and there should be no issue across this chamber with that provision. The policy aim of the Office of National Statistics to reclassify trust ports as non-public bodies will force privatisation on trust ports where there is no desire to do so. The bill itself is a very short yet important piece of legislation that is split into two parts, and I hope that we can have consensus across the chamber throughout its passage. The Scottish Government's bill should give assurances to harbours and their communities that their future is one where reinvestment and engagement is at its heart. In the written submission to the Scottish Government consultation, the British Ports Authority, on behalf of the Scottish Ports Committee, supported part 1 of the bill by saying, the Scottish Ports Committee fully supports repeal of section 10 of the Ports Act 1991, and it very much welcomes the proposals in as much as they will remove uncertainty for those ports above the privatisation threshold. It also confirmed support for the trust port model as a vital part of the ownership mix of ports in Scotland. The Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee heard in its evidence that the Scottish Government has not had a guarantee from the Office of National Statistics that it will reverse its decision following the passage of the bill. We take note of that and hope that, as the Government responded, the discussions with the ONS will be completed in due course and that the legislation will remove the ports from the new classification. As a member of the Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee, I am pleased with the stage 1 report, which is very concise. In evidence sessions, we heard from the Transport Minister and Government advisers. We can all be in agreement that the evidence that is collected is crucial in understanding what the bill seeks to address and how we achieve our aims. It is unfair that, because a port runs in the interest of its stakeholders, not shareholders, has a well-established revenue stream and reinvests its surplus to the benefit of its business and its local community, it should be privatised. In the event that the bill does not prevent the reclassification, we will work with the Scottish Government to prevent any damage to borrowing. With further devolution imminent and increased borrowing available, we must ensure that the classification does not hinder our ability to invest in Scottish public services and infrastructure. That is why we do not want to see borrowing by ports scored against the Scottish Government, despite the latter having no direct accountability for funding the former. The Government's consultation showed that nine out of 10 respondents agree that the Scottish Government should repeal section 10 of the Port Act 1991. With regard to part 2 of the bill, there was unanimous support to remove the requirement for six copies of a draft harbour order to be submitted. We support the Scottish Government with this proposal and we are delighted that 100 per cent of the respondents also did so. The bill itself is both preventative and reactionary to the ONS proposals, and I would like to repeat our support for the Scottish Government as harbours have long been lifelines in villages and towns that they helped to shape. The ONS classification could result in the privatisation of Aberdeen, Peterhead and Lerwick ports because of the thresholds that are set out. The trust ports, along with the rest of the trust ports in Scotland, have a long history going back decades and centuries. In advance of today's debate, I was reading up on the history of Aberdeen harbour. I was surprised to find that it is believed to be Britain's oldest existing business, dating back to the time of King David I, who granted charges on vessels entering the harbour in the 1100s. The harbour has helped to shape the economy of Aberdeen to this day and has survived the attacks in recent history during World War 2 and is far back as the 12th century by the Vikings. There has been a fishing harbour in Peterhead for more than 400 years, surviving when times were both bad and excelling in good times. Again, it is the history that shaped the ports and the harbours and the towns located nearby. While I agree that privatisation of trust ports would not damage their history, but for the future of our harbours, we must work to ensure that stakeholders are protected and that revenues are reinvested. In closing, can I reaffirm that Scottish Labour will support the bill today and throughout each stage? I look forward to listening to contributions from across the chamber in what is a short but nevertheless very important debate. Alex Johnson, five minutes are there by Mr Johnson. It gives me great pleasure to stand up time and time again in this chamber and accuse this Government of being the most centralising and authoritarian Government Scotland has ever seen. Therefore, it surprises me all the more to find ourselves standing here in a debate in which the main subject is the Scottish Government and the minister giving up a power. It is doubly interesting to discover that the power that he is giving up is the power to require ports to put together proposals for privatisation. At the end of the debate today, I am going to support him in that. Let me explain myself. The situation that we find ourselves in is that Scotland's trust ports, which are among some of the biggest and most impressive businesses in the case of Aberdeen, are examples of companies that, to all intents and purposes, operate as private companies already. They are sound businesses who make sound decisions based on charging and investment in the long term and, in the case of a local port of Aberdeen, have shown a great aptitude towards running successful businesses based on that model. The situation that we find ourselves in is that, as a result of section 10 of the Port Sack 1991, the requirement, once it has passed a certain level of turnover to prepare a proposal for privatisation, has been considered by the Office of National Statistics to put them in a position in which they must be reclassified as public bodies or public corporations. That is an unfortunate consequence of that legislation. The effect that it has is that it can, and in the case of Aberdeen, I believe, will, undermine its ability to borrow for its investment programme. With that investment programme now so close to the point where it will begin the construction process, it is important that we take that hurdle out of the way. The other parts of the bill that I have no problem with and do not even intend to address, I think that they speak for themselves. The key issue here is that we are removing a specific obstacle for a specific purpose. At 5 o'clock today, I and my other Conservative colleagues will vote for this legislation on the basis that it is part of a process designed to take away this unfortunate hurdle. However, at this point, we have no guarantee that the process will eventually end up with the Office of National Statistics changing its position and guaranteeing the outcome that we desire. For that reason, while I am fully supportive of the general principles of this legislation, I will reserve judgment at stage 3 to ensure that what we vote for will deliver the outcome that we desire. If, at that stage, it is clear that it will not result in that outcome, then it will be necessary for me to reconsider that position. This legislation is a good example of where this Parliament works very effectively to deal with specific problems. The way that it has been handled and the way that it has been processed so far is a good example of what is good about this Parliament. That is why it gives me no hesitation to offer my support at this stage with the qualifications that I have stated. Many thanks. We now move to open debate. I call on Chick Brody to be followed by Margaret McDougall. I welcome the opportunity to support the principles that are contained in the bill before us today. Harbors and ports are indeed the ports through which partly Scotland's economy feeds. Our harbors and ports in all parts of Scotland are also, more importantly, the heartbeat of many of the communities that they serve. The future of trust ports, as contained in the bill, must be planned and secured appropriately. They were, of course, home to fishing communities. They were the trade exchange forum. They helped our shipbuilding, steel and mining industries to become the best in the world. The trust ports and the local authority ports are intertwined with the individuals in the communities. As has been mentioned by Mary Fee, the Ports Act 1991, which was brought in under Margaret Thatcher, gave the right of ministers to compulsorily privatise ports. That was wrong then, and it is wrong today. My memory of history is that Margaret Thatcher was long gone by 1991. I think that, if you look today, Margaret Thatcher is still with us, Mr Johnson. You are absolutely right that it is in 1981. The compulsory privatisation powers under that act have not been used since devolution. We talk about other kinds of ports. There are private and trust ports and local authority ports, which I mentioned. All operating on a commercial basis receive almost no public funding. Some of our ports are local authority-funded, such as Sullenbow. As an example, the model has the flexibility to allow benefits to flow to the good people of Shetland. Aberdeen Harbour has been mentioned in its classification as a public corporation. Potentially, its reclassification to trust status gives the harbour and the Scottish Government the flexibility to borrow and invest in a cost-efficient manner, which, on the transfer of power, obviously provides best value for the community, the taxpayer and the people of Aberdeen. Private ports also have their contribution. As you will know, Air and Tune harbours are part of the Associated British Ports organisation. They are very important. Scotland will grow its export market significantly in the years to come. Our ports authorities must be secure, they must be flexible and must assist best as they can under the new transfer of powers in achieving this very significant goal, which will bring investment jobs and better standard of living to Scotland. The tourism trade, of which I will speak in the following debate, is very important. As is the fishing industry, as is the sports industry—we have the marina, for example, at Largs—the offshore wind market has now been given a lifeline or has given a lifeline to many of the ports, and it is a market that secures employment not just in the operational but also in the maintenance market. The bill, as proposed, gives Scotland the flexibility to grow its ports and harbour in a disciplined fashion. It will improve the legal framework for trust ports both in negating the need for privatisation and ons reclassification, which would jeopardise their future status and, of course, as the minister said, Government budgets. It is right that protection is afforded to trust ports with intervention to secure the transfer of rights and liability subject to Government advice. All of those things are very important. I would just like to finish by quoting the British Ports Association, which says that it very much welcomes the proposals in as much as they will remove uncertainty for those ports above the privatisation threshold. It also confins support for the trust port model as a vital part of the ownership mix in Scotland. I now call on Margaret Madougal, after which we will move to closing speeches. I would like to start by outlining the theory behind the Harbour Scotland bill, which is a concise and necessary piece of legislation. The main purpose of the bill is to remove the power from the Scottish ministers to require trust ports to bring forward proposals for privatisation. If I can get the words out, it would be even better. For clarity, a trust port is a port that has no shareholders or owners, and any surplus revenue is invested back into that port. ONS reclassified trust ports with a minimum annual turnover of £9 million as public corporations. That reclassification results in certain trust ports being forced into privatisation against their best interests and against the desire of their stakeholders. At the time of the bill being scrutinised by the Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee, Lerwick Port Authority and Peterhead Port Authority were the trust ports, which met the £9 million criteria, meaning that they would be required to bring forward proposals for privatisation due to the reclassification by the Office for National Statistics, despite nearer of those ports expressing a desire to be privatised. The Harbours Scotland Bill 2015 is a necessary piece of legislation that will stop any forced privatisation of a port simply because it has an annual turnover of £9 million. Private is not always best, and it appears to be a ridiculous situation whereby a port may have no desire to be privatised, but it may be forced into it against its best interests and against the desire of the stakeholders. Scottish ports are fundamental to the economy, and that is highlighted by the fact that, in 2000 or 2006, ports in Scotland handled 102 million tonnes of freight, which represented 17 per cent of the UK's total freight for the year. That is equivalent to 21 tonnes of freight per person in Scotland. I figure almost three times higher than in England. In 2006, it was revealed that port and harbour related activity, such as cargo handling and storage, warehousing, ship repair and construction, directly affected 18,000 jobs in Scotland. I emphasise that ports in Scotland are of particular importance, as they also have a unique role in connecting communities and handle over 10 million passengers movements each year. The trust port at Lerwick is a model example that illuminates the successes and benefits of the current system of trust ports in Scotland. Lerwick's modern ferry terminal has made an important contribution to the doubling of annual passenger numbers to around £133,000. The ferry provides overnight services to and from Aberdeen on the Scottish mainland, and it also calls at Kippwell and Orkney. Finally, I would just like to reiterate the necessity of passing the Harbour Scotland 2015 bill into law to ensure that thriving trust ports are not forced into a process of privatisation against their best interests and against the desire of their stakeholders because of the decision made by the ONS to reclassify it. I welcome that there appears to be consensus across the chamber for this important proposed legislation. I move the closing speeches. I call Alex Johnson to wind up on behalf of the Conservatives. Four minutes are thereby, Mr Johnson. I can assure you that this will be a short one because there is much left to say. It has been an interesting debate, but there is one thing that I have to emphasise. That is that this bill, I believe, is not about the anti-privatisation agenda, however much it might achieve that objective by other means. This is the fact that, as a quirk of a previous piece of legislation, the fact that the minister has the power to require ports to prepare a plan for privatisation puts into question whether they are outside or inside the control of that minister. The effect of the bill, as proposed, is to clarify that misunderstanding or that doubt to make sure that we do not have a situation where, as a result of the Office of National Statistics, making that decision that those ports fall within that responsibility covered by the minister and that their borrowing falls within the responsibility of the Government. Yes, briefly. Is the member aware that this problem occurs to other sectors of Scottish Government responsibilities, for example in colleges? Many colleges across Scotland cannot carry surpluses on because they are deemed to be public corporations? Alex Johnson There are some areas in Government responsibility where it is an advantage rather than an advantage, but, in that particular case, it is very important that we clarify this situation before we have ports fall foul of it. It has also been an interesting debate in that we have had a number of pieces of information raised. We had Mary Fee pointing out that Aberdeen has an extremely good record of sound business practice, having been charging for the use of its port as early as the 11th century. No surprise that Aberdeen was the first to come up with that principle. We have also had the opportunity, which I think he missed to some extent, where Jim Eadie, the committee convener, started with a wonderful collection of port-based puns, which I thought he was going to continue through the whole speech, but, unfortunately, he carried on to talk about serious issues. However, in bringing my remarks to a close, I would like to reiterate the fact that that is an important piece of legislation. It has a very specific function that carries a great benefit for a small number of ports in Scotland and avoids the situation in which the Government would have to take its borrowing into account as public borrowing. I think that that is an important step for us to take. I hope that, as a result of decisions that are still to be made or confirmed by the Office of National Statistics, we can get to a point where we can carry on without this restriction being in place. Therefore, I pledge my support to this legislation at 5 o'clock this afternoon. I now call on David Stewart. Six minutes are there by Mr Stewart. You are very kind, Presiding Officer. Thank you for your generous allocation of time. This has been, of course, a short and sharp debate on, as we have all heard, a non-controversal, a simple and sensible bill. I commend all members who have spoken here today on their imagination and ingenuity to say that the bill is a good thing and that it will last at least six or seven minutes. We perhaps all needed to become a poor man, Stuart Stevenson, who, in a doubted lake, would have invented or discovered a grandfather who was harvormaster Aberdeen Harbour in 1905. Alas, we did not. Perhaps I should make some quick feedback on the debate that the minister talked about a number of aspects of the bill, particularly the often-quoted aspect about privatisation. Although I must say that I thought that Alex Johnson at the time looked very crestfallen at the very mention of the lack of privatisation, Alex Johnson also stole on my line about Mary Fee's trip down memory lane. The fact that Aberdeen Harbour was Britain's Mary Fee—I made the point about Aberdeen Harbour—I have just got this bizarre image of Vikings having to pay a levy to Aberdeen Harbour following their regular raids in Aberdeen, but perhaps that already happened. We have also heard points from Jim Eadie. Again, I would emphasise his very, very poor puns, but he did emphasise a very serious point, the ICI Committee's support of the general principles of the bill. He does make a good point about the ONS reclassification. Let's all hope that, following the passing of this bill, the ONS will look at reclassifying the fact that our large approach could become larger public corporations. We have heard the issue about Aberdeen Harbour, which many members of the ICI Committee including myself visited. I must say that it is my first visit to Aberdeen Harbour. I was extremely impressed with the professionalism of the organisation and we also had a tour around the proposed harbour at Nig. I think that that will be a tremendous asset for the north-east. The member also cared to remember the opportunity he had to take the wheel of the pilot boat and run up and down the various docks in Aberdeen at great danger to the shipping public, I am sure. I am very glad for the member raising that point. I am sure that he broke several local bylaws, but of course the member will know the reason I was on the piloting boat was to look for floating boaters, but I did not find very many at that time. Talking of Mr Brody, he quite rightly made the analogy about harbours being the heartbeat of local communities. He also made some of the good points about air and trune and some of the wider points about the important role of fishing, sports and offshore renewables. I am glad that Mr Brody also supports the excellent model of transports that we have across Scotland. Of course, we have a good mixture between trust, private and local authority ports in Scotland, but transports are extremely important. We have heard from Margaret Doodle the positive effects on freight, jobs and passengers of the various ferry operators that we have. I would also flag up that the ICI committee is doing a first-class job, I would say that once again, in terms of looking into freight. We recently visited Rotterdam harbour, and I think that the minister may wish to comment on that in his closing remarks. Rotterdam harbour was the largest harbour in the whole world, and it is now eighth in the world, but the point that I would perhaps like the minister to look at when looking at best practice is that Rotterdam harbour not just provides a fantastic service for its clients, it has actually developed a freight-only infrastructure going all the way to the gates of Germany, which is a fantastic resource. Looking at best practice in the world must be good for the Scottish Government. I will give you one example in the brief time that I have got left. If you are delivering goods for Italy and you are going through the Mediterranean, the large container ships will not stop in Italy but go via Rotterdam so that they can use the freight-only service by rail all the way then to Italy. It is a good example of best practice on where ferry services really make a difference in the world. Mr Stewart, I can give you the time back for the intervention. You are very kind as well, Presiding Officer. I really appreciate that extra time that I have had, but I have visited several transports, just to keep in order, including Aberdeen, Cromarty Firth, Inverness, Lorwick, Malyg, Scrabster and Stornoway. In fact, I do remember, in a previous life, being invited to be at the opening of the Malyg harbour extension with Princess Royal. It was a very nerve-racking moment when I was asked to do a 10-minute speech in front of assembled masses, but Malyg showed a great example of taking that initiative of having an extension and also in Inverness harbour, where again I replicated history by having a shot in the harbour boat, not causing, hopefully, too much mayhem. However, I would like to flag up the great work that has been done there for freight, for the huge expansion in the marina. One interesting point that perhaps members might not be aware about is, for security reasons, Inverness harbour arranged a special arrangement so that when aviation oil was delivered to Inverness for RAF King Loss and Lossymouth, there is a new dedicated underground pipeline that goes all the way from Inverness harbour, a good transport, all the way to the old base at King Loss and the current base at RAF Lossymouth. In Scrabster, a fantastic harbour with great development work on the renewable industries. In some debates in this place where we all come together, this is certainly one. This seems to me a very sensible bill and this side will certainly give it to her to support. I believe that 100 per cent will be supporting this bill at decision time. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Your generosity knows no bounds. I thought that it was particularly gracious to give David Stewart the time for the intervention back when he was just looking to do a bit of filibustering. However, the spectators to the Parliament have been in for a real treat this afternoon, as the members have found that we are in absolute agreement of the purpose of the bill, its content, its scrutiny and its presentation. How, Presiding Officer, can I possibly spend eight minutes summing up where there is such agreement, such consensus on this clear bill, where everything has been taken into account? That is not a rhetorical point. I look forward to your note coming to me via the clerks, as to exactly how I spend eight minutes summing up this debate. I think that this… Can I just say, minister, that there is also time for interventions, if you will? Thank you very much for that guidance, Presiding Officer. I think that we have been able to showcase how the Parliament can work together using the functions of Parliament, through its scrutiny process, at inquiry, at committee, through to stage 1 debate. I know that the… I certainly will. David Stewart, how confident is the minister that the O&S will change its classification once the bill becomes law? Minister. I thank the member for that question. I am fairly confident that, considering the advice that we have been given, that this was the reason for that potential classification, that our clarification through this bill removes the element that gave some concern. I am fairly confident, but we cannot get an absolute answer from the O&S until the legislation is clearer, is indeed complete, and then it will run through its methodical process and give us a decision. I am entirely open-minded, but I am fairly confident—I am sure that we all are—that this will serve the purpose that is intended. The bill is, of course, clear, and that should give the clarity that the O&S seeks. It gives the support to the trust model. I think that this debate has been worth having for that reason. It should give the clarification, and it tidies up the bureaucracy. The fourth point is a surprise to all of us. It says that it will help deliver Alex Johnstone along the journey towards public services not necessarily privatisation. I understand fully on a matter of technicality, Mr Johnstone. I have always been the first in this chamber to make clear that the concept of public service is not unique to the public sector. It is also something that has a great tradition in the private sector and one that we should encourage. However, in that particular case, we almost get back to an old argument that I remember having in that chamber once before as to whether the co-operative model was a public or a private sector model. I argued that it was a private sector model, or that other parts of the chamber chose to argue that it was somehow a public sector model. I think that the trust port model is a wonderful one, one that we should encourage, one that we should support. After the passage of the legislation, one that we can thoroughly define as a private sector model. I may not agree with Mr Johnstone, but I was delighted to have been able to stimulate him there into that intervention. Can I reflect on Jim Eadie, the convener's contribution, of course, his puns? I had great hope that the puns would last the entire speech. He gave up on the puns for 43 seconds, but I thought that it was a valiant effort. I can say that the Government does anchor our hopes in terms of reclassification on that. That is the biggest groen that we have had in the chamber all day, but on this particular bill. It does not give us guarantees, but it should give us progress. There has been great value attached to the consultation. It showed another way forward in terms of mediation, which we are taking into account, and we will produce the guidance on that. There is an important philosophical point around the model, and whether forced privatisation plans would be necessary or just an unnecessary exercise in itself, but, importantly, by carrying out that action and, if ONS agrees, it continues to give Government the necessary financial flexibility in accounting terms to not have spending, which we have not occurred or incurred against us. The information about Aberdeen harbour was very interesting, and David Stewart's invitation to visit Rotterdam harbour is one that I will consider. I have been to Rotterdam harbour once before, and I was very impressed with how they used their infrastructure. I remember seeing someone transport their house along the river, which was quite impressive. It was just about to come to Chick Brody on the value of ports, so I will take that intervention. I thank the minister for taking the intervention. When he talks about infrastructure, he will be aware of the European 10T programme, which is a trans-European network transport programme that has 26 billion euros available over the next six years, part of which is to be dedicated to the improvement of harbours and ports to reduce the sulphur emissions. Once that transfer has been fulfilled, will he encourage the harbours and ports authorities to engage appropriately? Of course I will, because it is important, and it connects to David Stewart's point and the convener's point about infrastructure investment as well. As identified in the national planning framework 3, I was able to lead as the appropriate planning minister at the time, investment in that infrastructure is so necessary and important to our economy. If we can leverage in further funding, including from Europe, that would be very welcome, of course. David Stewart. The point about 10T is a very good one, and the issue that I mentioned about the Rotterdam freight-only line was that 4.8 billion euros was partly funded by the 10T programme. That makes the point about added investment. I thought that Margaret McDougall's contribution was very helpful and found purpose in describing to his definitions as a way to fill a four-minute contribution, but it is very helpful in the debate as it was. Alex Johnson touched on what he described as the centralising nature of this Government. I would object to that. I was a minister who led the community empowerment bill, and it now falls to Marko Biagio, to take that bill forward. However, I hope that he sees the nature of empowerment in this bill as it is presented to Parliament. I am mindful that he also had no hesitation in supporting the bill, subject to assurances that may lead him to vote against in stage 3 if we do not get the assurances from ONS. I will work very hard to get those assurances from the ONS. I thank all members for their contribution. That has been necessary in terms of clarity, classification, accountability, tidying up bureaucracy and the disapplication of that power in terms of primary legislation will hopefully serve the purpose that we all agree on. I thank all members for contributing to this, which I am sure will help us to argue with the ONS in terms of classification of trust ports in Scotland. That concludes the debate on stage 1 of the Harbors Scotland bill. It is now time to move on to the next item of business, and I will allow a few seconds for members to change places. The next item of business is a debate on motion number 13510 in the name of Fergus Ewing on marine tourism. I invite members who would wish to speak in this debate to press the request to speak buttons now, please, and a call on Fergus Ewing to speak to and to move the motion. Minister, 10 minutes please. I would like to start by highlighting the importance of marine and coastal tourism to Scotland because of the variety of opportunities offered right across the country. Marine tourism encompasses the manifold varieties of ways in which we enjoy our magnificent coast and indeed the sea. That encompasses sailing, yachting and swimming. It includes beautiful beaches such as those of the white sands of Morer on the west coast, or Dalmore in Lewis near to and the preferred beach of Katie Morag, and the two beaches of Nairn in my constituency, entitled east and west. It includes cruise liners and small motor powered boats. It includes canoeists, kayakers, divers and ferry passengers. It covers coastal communities and businesses. It covers numerous activities such as sea angling, marine wildlife watching, day boat trips, motor boating, coastal rowing, surfing, windsurfing, kite surfing and water skiing. No doubt many more, as members will regale us with during this debate. Each of those activities adds to the distinctiveness of Scotland's magnificent coastline and attracts many tourists each year. The Scottish Government wishes further to encourage that. We support the work of the Scottish Marine Tourism Development Group in their aim to maximise visitor offering experience and, of course, the economic impact of marine tourism. The industry-led, launched strategic framework for Scotland's marine tourism sector was launched on 5 March. The strategy is that it is awakening the giant and the action plan that it will deliver has brought together an enormous coalition of the aquatic enthusiastic, and we have much to be enthusiastic about. Scotland has, of course, a long distinguished history and association with the sea. Our sea area, I am assured, is six times the land mass of Scotland, over 460,000 square kilometres, and our national marine plan is the first statutory national plan in the UK. As Lewis MacDonald's amendment notes, the vision in that plan is for seas that are clean, healthy, safe, productive and diverse. I should say that we shall be supporting the amendment in his name this afternoon. That helps us to attract visitors from across the world, as well as closer to home. There has been a huge amount of work, across stakeholders and industry, before the launch of the marine tourism framework. I think that it would be appropriate that I acknowledge the work of the cross-party group—a very active cross-party group here in the Scottish Parliament—and, if I may say so, the unstinting work of the co-convener Stuart McMillan MSP in driving that forward. Stuart and I also enjoyed the hospitality offered by Port Edgar Marina on 20 May to publicise the work of the annual EU Maritime Day. We both immediately recognised the Maritime Day theme this year of using ports and coasts as gateways to the wider marine-based opportunities and areas as one that we already encourage in Scotland. Never forget, of course, that marine visitors don't just spend on their own particular activity—for example, sailing—they also spend on food, on drink, entertainment, including onshore excursions and activities, retail, nautico, chandlery supplies. I am sure that many a great night is had ashore. Indeed, the debate secured by Kenny Gibson in this chamber in March highlighted the existing work on coastal and marine tourism being undertaken by Aaron and how an integrated approach to marketing can help market to all a destination has to offer. Aaron being marketed as one of the cold water islands. I can assure you, Presiding Officer, that that name is correct, as I discovered when I dived off Corrie Pier in 1976, an experience that I have unsuccessfully managed not to forget ever since. The marine national plan aims to open up coastal areas further for tourism. That plan shows that we have many great assets, unique selling points, which can help us and do help us boost marine tourism. The Caledonian canal is foremost among those. We work with Scottish canals to maximise the value for tourism from 1,200 vessels that transited the canal last year and that links with the Great Glenway, which is now growing in reputation as a must-do long walk, just as the West Highland Way or the Space Side Way and the Hebridean Way, which I hope to formally open and launch, went on holiday in Lewis in a few weeks' time. Dave Thompson highlighted those linkages last year in a member's debate. Therefore, what we aim to do is link the land with the sea, marine tourism with land-based development. That means building more marinas with more moorings. It means many fine restaurants catering for our visitors who sail the west coast, as well as those competing competitions in the east, navigating our inland waters and those in transit around our coasts from the Scandic markets. There is a huge potential market in Scandinavia and other countries, and closer friends such as in Holland. Turning to cruise liners, as you know, the Scottish Government is working closely with Cruise Scotland and Visit Scotland to continue to grow the cruise sector. It is a huge market. The UK Chamber of Shipping estimates that the average cruise passenger is worth £74 to the local economy. That means spending £74 in the local economy. In the past year, four years, the number of passengers has increased by over 150,000 to over 400,000 passengers, with more than 450 vessels docking in our shores during 2015. We see particular increases in passengers arriving in ports such as Greenock, Kirkwall, Stornoway and Edinburgh. That shows an enormous success for an industry that is truly global in reach. We supported Cruise Scotland attending the inaugural European Cruise Tourism Dialog Symposium in Brussels in March this year. However, one of the on-going issues remains the effect that the unconsulted on-face to document passport checks is having on the cruise industry. The unwelcome and on-going uncertainty regarding costs also means that our smaller ports are wary of considering how they might attract smaller vessels, which could serve the more specialist niche markets. For example, wildlife cruises, history and heritage. The Scottish Government shall continue to press the UK Government on this issue. However, I am pleased to note that Tracey Crouch MP, the new UK parliamentary under-Secretary of State for Sport and Tourism, was a member of the Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee that recognised the key role of visas within tourism. That committee's March 2015 report on tourism recognised the need that, quotes, "...border force staffing levels are maintained at levels that can meet the demand posed by what we will hope will be the increasing number of tourists." Drawing my remarks to a close, the strategic framework seeks to maximise the opportunities to grow marine tourism by providing a framework under which all the different elements of the marine tourism sector can grow. As part of that, I would like to encourage everyone involved, and especially local authorities and our Lomond and Trossach national park, to work with all of the tourism industry to encourage imaginative linkages across Scotland, highlighting all that Scotland's coasts have to offer, whether viewed from on the land or from the sea. In closing, I move motion S4M-13510 and confirm that I would accept the amendment in the name of Lewis MacDonald. I now call on Lewis MacDonald to speak to and move amendment 13510.1. Seven minutes, please, Mr MacDonald. Thank you very much. I think that the minister's opening speech today has illustrated just how far there is wide agreement on the value of marine tourism and the benefits that it brings to the Scottish economy. Most people in Scotland live close, either to the coast or to our inland waterways or else to freshwater locks, which also attract tourists and add value to the local economy. There is public support, therefore, and a general recognition that Scotland has a distinctive high-quality offer that attracts visitors from across the islands and beyond. That underpins cross-party support for a strategic approach to growing the sector. Of course, I must congratulate the minister on his choice of the Isle of Lewis as a holiday destination for this year. At much the same time, my family and I will be enjoying the equally unspoiled attractions of the Gallic coast of Argyll. I am looking forward to that immensely, but we should not shy away from the fact that there are also some genuinely challenging issues to resolve, because tourism in the marine environment must take its place alongside many other important activities, and all of those activities must go forward in a way that is sustainable in environmental and ecological terms. The sensitivity of that has been highlighted again in recent days, following the announcements about the intended management measures in Scotland's planned new marine protected areas. I am sure that ministers will agree to meet the Scottish Fisher Mentors Federation to discuss their concerns, but those concerns on the part of fishing communities highlight just how important it is to join up policy in all areas affecting the marine environment. Our amendment today stresses that, but also stresses the importance of good environmental standards on our beaches and highlights the potential for ecotourism on and offshore. Measured against the new tougher European Union standards that have come into force, SIPA reported this month that water quality at one-quarter of Scotland's designated bathing areas could be classified as poor. The cleanliness of Scotland's beaches is hugely important to the families that use them for recreation and to the canoeists and surfers and divers and water skiers and the others that have already mentioned who venture further offshore. This year's report was clearly disappointing, but I am glad to say that SIPA have recognised the need to redouble its efforts with partners to sort this out. I very much welcome the minister's support for our amendment today and his acknowledgement of its positive intent. Of course, our focus is not just on where the challenges lie but also on the potential of the biodiversity of our coasts and seas as a tourist attraction in itself. It is important to acknowledge that a good deal has been done over the last 30 years to help to address the pollution problem when it exists. There is also general agreement about the importance of partnership working to address both the challenges and the opportunities. Working through the Scottish Marine Tourism Group, a range of bodies, led by the British Marine Federation, the Royal Yachting Association and Sales Scotland, have taken a collective lead in preparing the strategic framework to which the minister has already referred. In writing that framework, Awakening the Giant, those bodies had the support from a whole range of public bodies as well. From Highlands and Islands Enterprise, the Crown Estate and Scottish Canals to Event Scotland, Visit Scotland, Scottish Enterprise and Scottish Development International. That combination of private, voluntary and public effort is key to the success of the sector as a whole. Awakening the Giant focuses first of all on sailing and boating activities that already generate more than £100 million of visitor spending each year. That sector could be even more lucrative with the right strategy rolled out, and I welcome much of what it has to say. It is critical, however, that any plan to increase involvement in the whole range of marine sports and activities should include all those public bodies and, indeed, in some cases, private proprietors who have responsibility for the management and sustainability of our waterways, coasts and harbours. The future of trust ports is of great importance here, and that matter has been debated separately already this afternoon. A very good example of how harbours can combine tourism awareness with their core commercial business is provided by Aberdeen Harbour, the busiest trust port in the country, home to healthy populations of seals, porpoises and dolphins. Aberdeen Harbour board earlier this year launched a new code of practice to protect the dolphins, which swim in and out in pursuit of salmon. It also has its own marine tourism offer of boat trips around the harbour to see both the seals and the oil industry support vessels up close. Harbour authorities have a role to play in marine tourism, and so do the Crown Estate and Scottish Canals, with the responsibility on the one hand for the foreshore and seabed and on the other for our purpose-built inland waterways. Local councils too have extensive responsibilities, as do our national park authorities and public bodies such as SEPA and Scottish Natural Heritage. It would be useful to hear the minister's views about the future management and division of responsibilities for the Crown Estate's marine assets in Scotland. The Smith agreement, as he will know, laid down that the management of these assets should be devolved to Scotland, and the Scotland bill that was debated elsewhere yesterday makes provision for that to happen. However, the Smith agreement equally involved a commitment by all parties to the further devolution of responsibility for the Crown Estate from the Scottish level to our islands councils and to any other local authorities that want such powers. The Scottish Government has not yet laid out how it intends to take this forward, and perhaps the minister can give us an indication of that today. The involvement of Scotland's enterprise and export agencies is also important, because tourism of all sorts is a revenue-generating business and contributes to the wider economy. That means that there is a need for developing sectoral strengths and addressing deficiencies in the context of that wider economy. It is important, for example, that VisitScotland and EventsScotland should continue to support the development of the marine tourism sector. Events such as the Scottish traditional boat festival at Port Soy are attractive in themselves, but they can also be used as a hook to bring in visitors who can then explore other exciting aspects of what Scotland has to offer. Our amendment refers to the importance of environmental standards in diversifying marine tourism in Scotland. Eco-tourism is a growth industry, whether that is highly accessible while life-watching boat trips or specialised diving and underwater photography. There are, of course, many other potential growth areas if we get the partnership working and the priorities right. That way, we can build on the strengths that we already have to diversify and to grow the sector as a whole. I am confident that we can continue to do that on the basis of shared objectives, as long as we can acknowledge where improvements still need to be made. This debate can help us to get there, and on that basis I move the amendment in my name. I now call on Jamie McGregor. The Scottish Conservatives recognise the importance of marine tourism to the Scottish economy, and I am particularly aware of its economic significance in my region of the Highlands and Islands. The Highlands and Islands have some of the best environments for marine tourism in Europe, if not the world, from the famous crinon and caledonian canals to the tropical-esque blue waters of the western isles to our wonderful marine wildlife and indeed our wind resources that can be perfect for windsurfing in places like Tyree and Kintyre. The boating sector in Scotland is vibrant and diverse, and alone generates about 100 million per annum. I think we need to expand that capacity. The Scottish Government's marine tourism strategy correctly identifies the need to improve harbour and marina infrastructure and increase the provision of pontoons and jetties around Scotland's coast. The need for new pontoons and a transit marina for visiting boats in Oban, already well known as the Gateway to the Isles, has been a big issue in the town for years now and has been championed by Oban Bay Marine to whom I pay a tribute and to many local businesses who supported it. They are incredibly frustrated though and I share that frustration that all the hard work they have undertaken has not yet led to this project moving ahead and they want to see, I want to see, Argyll and Bute Council take a more constructive, proactive and urgent approach. It has been eight years since the council adopted transit marina as part of the proposed redevelopment of a number of towns in Argyll. A town centre transit marina would be a big boost to the local economy. Indeed, Oban Bay Marine has to make Oban is losing a million pounds per year. Each year the project is delayed and we need to see this project move ahead without further delay so that Oban businesses can benefit from an increase in recreational boats and yachts stopping in this wonderful, beautiful Argyll town. While we can agree with the Scottish Government's motion today, it will be remiss of me not to highlight the significant concerns of marine tourism business such as boatyard operators about the pending changes to the operation of the Crown Estate in Scotland which they fear might lead to an increase in ground rent charges. A number of concerned businesses in my region have already contacted me on this subject and I wrote to the cabinet secretary early this year on their behalf. I know that the cross-party group for marine tourism and recreational boating has also taken up this issue with the Government. In addition, the Royal Yotting Association has spoken out, citing its very constructive working relationship that it has with the Crown Estate and raising concerns about the possible transfer of current Crown Estate functions to local authorities. Marine tourism and boatyard businesses in my region have made it very clear to me that the Crown Estate currently manages local harbors and mooring areas in a highly professional, efficient and successful way involving local groups in decision making. This has been my experience in the Crown Estate more generally over the years also and crucially the Crown Estate have developed a team of people who have a great deal of expertise and exceptional knowledge. It's absolutely vital that we don't lose this and that we avoid putting in place a new system which increases costs on marine businesses potentially reducing the number of boats in our harbors something that could have such a negative effect on the coastal communities. So I strongly urge ministers to take on board the very real concerns that exist in this area and to conclude, Presiding Officer, I again welcome today's debate and I join the Minister and others in acknowledging the efforts of the Scottish Marine Tourism Development Group and I'd also like to echo his remarks about the groups, the cross-party groups leader who has made terrific efforts. Thank you very much. Many thanks. We now turn to the open debate. Members were previously advised that it would be speeches of four minutes but on recalculating the time this afternoon I can give members up to five minutes. Stuart McMillan, to be followed by Graham Pearson. Thank you very much Presiding Officer and I sit and I welcome this debate and I want to thank the minister and also Jamie McGregor for their kind remarks and their speeches. I sit with this is very much at an important time for the marine tourism offering and I will focus my comments upon the awakening of the giant publication that the minister spoke about and it's also in the motion before us. I also want to touch upon how a cross-party group has actually greatly pushed the marine tourism agenda. As members know, I do chair the cross-party group in records for boating marine tourism, which meets tonight at 6pm in committee room 4 and you are all kindly invited. The awakening of the giant report wouldn't have happened without the cross-party group. It's genesis actually was an ever cross-party group. We knew that the recreational boating and wider marine tourism sector had something greater to offer, but anecdotal evidence wasn't enough to convince the public sector to invest and nor should it have been. The sector agreed that it needed to do more to actually highlight the existing product, highlight the opportunities and highlight a pathway to getting that economic benefit for the sector and also for Scotland. Our cross-party group started that work. It helped immensely along the way and now we have the first ever national strategy for the sector. That document is by no means at the end of the journey. In fact, this is the beginning of the next phase, making offering the best that it can be. My personal aim is to make Scotland the world place to go for sailing, recreational boating and marine tourism activities, and I believe that we should all have that particular aim. From our first symposium two years ago to this publication, to our second symposium later on this year, which is currently being organised, to which we will all be invited, we are leading the agenda and the Scottish Government and its agencies are wholly supportive, and I believe that we will go from strength to strength. The second point that I want to highlight is something in the national marine plan. In the chapter on recreation and tourism, there is a reference to improved data collection on marine and coastal recreational activities, including key recreational resources and access points enabling better targeted and long-term planning for those activities. Once again, this is a success for the cross-party group. This is actually one of the key action points that we agreed upon at the last symposium two years ago. This is now being delivered, and I am delighted that it has been taken up, and I know that there are some talented people working on this particular activity. I believe that the results from this and the sector by-in will prove invaluable for the industry going forward. The marine tourism offering covers many areas, some of which we have heard about already, particularly in the minister's opening speech. One such growing area is that of the cruise liner sector. From a small base just over 10 years ago, it is now worth over some £50 million to the Scottish economy, and in Inverclyde, it is estimated to be worth some £8 million alone. This year, we will see the Greenock Ocean terminal break over 100,000 passengers for the first time. That will be the first port in Scotland to do so. It deserves every credit as do the volunteers of the tremendous Inverclyde tourism group, whom the minister has previously met. Every member of that tourism group understands that tourism is everyone's business. They are exemplars of delivering the friendly welcome, which has been so lauded, and they have people from other parts of the islands go to meet them to find out about the secret. As the minister knows, a campaign has been launched recently to bring the QE2 back to the Clyde, and what a wonderful sight it would be seeing the QE2 berth in the Clyde. I support the campaign and my preference for it to be in Greenock, as deep water could accommodate it. I have had a wee discussion with Gil Paterson, my colleague, because he would like to say that, over in the north part of the river, bearing in mind that it was built on the northern part of the river, it could become a fabulous tourism opportunity in conjunction with the growing cruise liner industry. As an aspiration, it is not without its challenges, however, and with reduced budgets to the Parliament, being the main one. I know that the Scottish Government and its agencies and local government do not have endless pots of money at their disposal. However, I ask for Scottish Enterprise to work with others to initiate a feasibility study into the project. What a boost it could offer that success, but it does stress that there are major challenges to be faced. I welcome this important debate, and I am delighted to champion the marine tourism sector in the Parliament. We have the scenery, the hospitality, the food, the culture, the heritage and the people. Those are now being brought together like never before. Marine tourism is a gem in Scotland's offering, and I know that this cross-party group in this Parliament has helped hugely in driving forward that agenda and its future success. Many thanks. I now call Graham Pearson to be followed by Kenneth Gibson. Thank you, Presiding Officer. This afternoon's debates seem to indicate that the business managers have something of a sense of humour in that we have a themed afternoon. First visiting Harbour Scotland Bill before moving on to marine tourism, that theme has encouraged our Cabinet Secretary, Fergus Ewing and Lewis MacDonald to ruminate the adventures of holidays that lie ahead of them, even though we have a heavy fortnight ahead of us with stage 3 debates, etc. Marine tourism is indeed one of the sleeping giants in the Scottish economy. Stuart McMillan and his cross-party group must be delighted at the fact that they have generated sufficient action to see support for marine tourism and its aims in the future. It is reported by Visit Scotland that sailing and boating alone already generate more than £100 million of visitors' expenditure and directly support employment for 2,730 jobs. That is good news for Scotland and good news for the future. The British Marine Federation in 2014 estimated that the economic value of marine tourism in Scotland was around £360 million. More generally, tourism, which is so crucial to Scotland's cultural and economic wellbeing and sustains a great diversity of business throughout the country, was recorded. It contributed some £11 billion to the Scottish economy in direct and indirect spending and must support somewhere in excess of 200,000 jobs. In my region in the south of Scotland, many ports and areas rely heavily on marine tourism. Strunrar, Ballantre, Gervan, Airport, Logan, I'm Out and Bar all look forward to the development of marine tourism in the future. The cabinet secretary will know that I have already raised with him the future, particularly of Strunrar as a port and the importance of developing Strunrar for the future in terms of tourism to give that community a hope of our local economy. The most recent Visit Scotland visitor experience survey confirmed that scenery and natural environment are key concerns for Scottish tourism. 90 per cent of visitors cited it as either a very important or an important factor when choosing Scotland as a holiday destination. As convener of the cross-party group in China, I can report to the chamber the importance that our Chinese tourists attach to our environment and to that experience. Increasingly, as years lie ahead, all being well, we will see many thousands of Chinese tourists coming here and they hope to see Scotland in its natural state. They want to see the white beaches, the harbours, the sailing experience—something that they are not attuned to seeing in the many towns and cities that they travel from. Indeed, the council general came with me to Dumfries and Galloway some 18 months ago. He spent days thereafter telling me how impressed he was with the environment that he visited and how much the people of China would value coming to Scotland for that experience. I did with the wildlife watching in coastal and marine areas, which again accounts for more than £160 million in tourist expenditure. That whole field of endeavour is, I would suggest, as important as any other economic development that we are involved in across our entire environment. However, it is not merely about money. It is also about the quality of life that it brings, not only for the tourists who visit us but also for our local communities, who benefit from the visitations and who enjoy the cruise tourism that, increasingly, Scotland has experienced. With 45,000 cruise passengers reported back in 2000 to know that it has achieved more than 400,000 in 2015, it shows the growth potential that lies there. Importantly, the visitations from those cruise ships also create a culture and a community that has resilience, confidence and that can plan for the future. All that must be good for Scotland and must be good for the people who live in our country and encourage all the more to come here and join with us. I am happy to support the Government's motion. I am delighted that the cabinet secretary has indicated support for the Labour amendment, and I give all strength to the Government's arm in developing this area of activity. Marine tourism is important to many of my constituents, particularly those living in the island communities of Arnhem Cymru and in coastal towns, from solcoats in the south to skirmallate in the north of my constituency. Scotland, as we know, is blessed with its abundance of assets, energy people, scenery and produce. Along with those, our marine environment features highly in the strong-hand nature-dealt Scotland. Our waters are rich in some of the finest seafood on the planet with Scottish oysters, scallops, langoustines, crabs and lobsters found on dining tables of top restaurants around the world, and our seafood exports are soared to a whopping £613 million last year. Scotland is vibrant, aquatic ecosystems, incredible coastal communities and stunning beaches. Incidentally, Arnhem Cymru is the only officially recognised nudist beach in Scotland should any hardy soul wish to experience it. At times, of course, it is too cold for some members. The Scottish Government has worked hard to recognise and develop a strong and growing marine tourism sector. Although the marine environment can be harnessed and enjoyed sustainably, we must remain conscious of how fragile it is. We must treat our waters as an asset, requiring careful management and protection. To that end, I welcome the Scottish Government's objectives and policies for marine tourism and recreation to sit out in Scotland's national marine plan, ensuring that growth is sustainable and allowing us to reap the rewards of our marine environment long into the future. Marine tourism is indeed one of Scotland's sleeping giants. We have heard of the excellent work done by my colleague, Stuart McMillan, and indeed others in the cross-party group in expanding the recreational boating sector. In my constituency, it is both Largs Yothaven and Ardrossan Marina. Largs Yothaven recently celebrated its 30th anniversary, and I was going to become Scotland's first five gold anchor marina, supporting 730 berths, over 120 jobs, 17 business premises and a 250-space boatyard with two travel hoists. Clearly, Largs Yothaven has been a huge success story and demonstrates the massive potential of the sector holds. Indeed, the minister will no doubt recall that he and I visited Largs Yothaven together in October 2013 to meet the businesses and charities operating there, and I am sure he will attest to my comments today. Ardrossan will much less establish as a hugely positive impact on changing the image of the town and his opportunity to further grow and develop. For those of you who have not yet visited and experienced the restaurants, shops and scenery of the North Ayrshire coast for yourself, I cannot recommend them highly enough. The Isle of Arran, which the minister touched on earlier in reference to cold water tourism, is home to a growing and dynamic marine tourism sector, with many visiting to participate in kayaking, windsurfing, yachting, scuba diving and other sports. Along with the introduction of road equivalent tariff, the growing sector will be a huge boost to many island businesses who have found times tough in recent years. I have already touched on marine sustainability, and again with Arran in mind, I wish to take this opportunity to salute the efforts of the community of Arran seabed trust, an organisation dedicated to protection and restoration of the marine environment around Arran and the Clyde. Following many years of dredging and trolling, the sea floor around much of Arran has become increasingly barren and with little shelter for young fish stocks declined markedly. By working with and listening to coast, I am pleased that the Scottish Government introduced Scotland's first and no-take zone in Llamllash Bay in 2008, and last year designated the South Arran marine protected area, the only entirely community-led marine protected area in Scotland. For his extraordinary efforts over many years, Howard Wood of coast this year was awarded the highly coveted international goldman environmental prize, the first time the award has gone to someone in Scotland. To feel appreciate what has been achieved by Howard and everyone at coast, I recommend watching the short video on YouTube entitled Howard Wood 2015 goldman environmental prize. The video features a short comment from me and, perhaps more interestingly, is narrated by Robert Redford, which I believe allows me to claim that I have starred alongside him to some degree. On top of the progress that is already achieved by coast and the Scottish Government, I warmly welcome the statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and Environment last week that marine conservation order will be put before Parliament, setting out conversation measures to ban the highly destructive practice of scallop dredging within the South Arran marine protected area and to other west coast MPAs. Those measures not only protect fish stocks, sustain the fishing industry for years to come, but also a diverse ecosystem on the seabed around Arran, which is becoming increasingly popular with scuba divers and marine researchers from all over the world. People contribute strongly to marine tourism and the Scottish economy. In closing, I would again like to welcome the water undertaken by coast to the Scottish Government and the Scottish Marine Tourism Development Group, by ensuring that the sleeping giant wakes from its slumber. Thank you, Mr Gibson. I was glad that I was able to give you that extra minute to tell us about your venture into Hollywood. Liam McArthur, to be followed by Angus MacDonald. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. We could have been spared the story of his venture down the new speech of Arran. I, too, welcome this brief debate as Orkney's MSP. I certainly need no persuading about the importance of marine tourism to our economy, particularly the local economies of our island and coastal communities. Like others, I will focus on the constituency dimension to this debate, given the success Orkney has enjoyed in developing marine tourism, playing to its strengths in terms of its natural resources, but also the skills of its people working in harmony with the former and constantly looking to broaden and enhance the latter. Success also requires investment in appropriate infrastructure, although there appear to be no plans to follow Arran's lead in setting aside facilities for the adventurous nudists. Orkney offers interesting examples of the sort of challenges that can arise from success, but let me start as the motion encourages us to do by reflecting on the enormous opportunities. Orkney was once described by the Lonely Planet Guide as the glittering centrepiece in Scotland's treasure chest of attractions. There are many reasons for that, of course, but the richness of our marine environment is certainly one of the main ones. Over recent years, increasing numbers come to enjoy wildlife tours organised by an expanding group of small local businesses run by individuals with a wealth of expertise that helps to bring to life the experience for visitors. This year, perhaps a pod of Orcas has been the stand-out attraction for visitors and locals alike. Scythings around Skappa Flow, including yesterday off Hawks Ahead, have been frequent. The photos posted on websites and social media have been utterly breathtaking. An interesting aspect of how the marine tourism sector has developed in Orkney has been the extent to which local people have taken an increasingly close interest in what it is to be found around their shores. That, in turn, has the added advantage of ensuring that tourists are able to draw on a far wider range of local expertise from the professional through to the holy voluntary. Clearly, the presence of Orcas may discourage some from venturing into the water, but despite that, Orkney has a fantastic reputation for diving, particularly thanks to the many wartime wrecks found on the seabed of Skappa Flow, a legacy of Orkney's strategically important role as the base for the Grand Fleet and the Atlantic Fleet during the First and Second World Wars. Here, I would make a specific request of the minister, having a dive sector of such significance, as well as a marine renewables industry with which he will be very familiar, creates a need for hyperbaric facilities in Strumnes. To date, those have been funded locally with national funding directed to the hyperbaric chamber in Aberdeen. Orkney, though, now deals with around half of the overall cases, and this funding distribution is increasingly hard, therefore, to justify. I would encourage the minister to look at how that can be addressed. However, let me finish with a couple of other success stories. As with other parts of the country, Orkney has invested heavily in marine facilities currently located in Cutwell, Strumnes and Westry, with 50% growth and visits over the last two years, and, more anticipated, further investment in infrastructure will be needed to cope. Indeed, I understand that a further marina in Shaftonsley may now be on the cards, all of which helps to provide additional opportunities to grow but also broaden the benefits from this sector. Similar opportunities, as other colleagues have mentioned, are being seized elsewhere in Scotland, and I think that competition is healthy. It also makes us a more attractive proposition by opening up the chance to plot routes, taking in different communities and enriching the overall experience. Something similar also seems to be happening in relation to the cruise liner market. Again, as Stuart McMillan explained in Berkley, many other ports are witnessing impressive growth, but the pace of that growth in Orkney is truly phenomenal. In 2009, we hosted 29,000 cruise liner passengers and 10,000 crew. This has risen to 80,000 and 30,000 respectively. Next year, I record 87 liners have confirmed their intention to include a stop in the islands. I firmly believe that this has benefited the islands that I represent. I am aware that it has also brought challenges to particularly shore side. Already, a limit has been set on the numbers that can be allowed to shore at any one time, but even then, an influx of 4,500 people into a community of just over 20,000 can be hard to accommodate without causing disruption to the local population or potentially compromising the quality of experience for visitors. An example of where the current infrastructure really has struggled is in terms of the availability of coaches. Whereas on the Scottish mainland, additional coach capacity can be increased relatively quickly, as and when required, in the islands, that is less straightforward. The minister will be aware of those concerns from his meetings with Cruise Scotland, but I would urge him to look at what can be done to help places such as Orkney to deal with that issue. One possible option may be to look at how that can be used as an opportunity to promote investment in electric vehicles, thereby helping to deliver on objectives around greener ecotourism. I do not expect an answer from the minister today, but I would be grateful if he would agree to ask his officials and relevant agencies to reflect further and report back. On the upside, let me conclude by saying that I have not touched on many of the issues that I should have. I welcome the comments from Lewis MacDonald in relation to the devolving of the responsibility of the Crown Estate. I think that the omission of the Northern Isles from RAT is hampering our marine tourism businesses, but I certainly welcome the afternoon's brief debate to support the motion and the amendment and look forward to the other contributions, including the minister's response. I am afraid that the other members before have gone slightly over the time in effort. I must ask the next three members to keep strictly to five minutes. I welcome the opportunity to speak in today's debate on marine tourism. Although my constituency does not have a large sea coastline, I have a significant share of the river force and, of course, the start of the Forth and Clyde canal connecting with the Union canal. I also have the largest container port in Scotland at Grangemouth. However, that does not tend to attract many tourists, I have to admit. However, Falkirk district does have a long history and association with the sea with former bustling ports from centuries gone by at Bones and Cairnshawr. Up to the 21st century, Falkirk quail and the Millennium Link canal network. Given that my constituency is closely associated with past and present industrial activity, you are probably wondering what relevance marine tourism has to the people of Grangemouth and the wider Falkirk East constituency. However, I believe that marine tourism has a relevance and an impact on most parts of Scottish society. Although it is right and proper that it has its own national marine plan and we debate and consider it separately from tourism in general, I believe that by considering it in isolation, there is a risk of failing to maximise the opportunities that marine tourism can bring to different sectors. Marine tourism is already an important part in the Scottish economy and makes a notable impact on rural and remote economies. At this point, I pay tribute to the work and progress that the cross-party group on recreational boating and marine tourism has made in this regard. Convened by our colleague Stuart McMillan, the CPG has ensured marine tourism as well and truly on the agenda. Many consider marine tourism to be solely coastal tourism cruising and recreational activities that are undertaken out at sea. Having just been in Stornoway at the weekend, I saw at first hand the new £1.15 million yacht marina at the harbour with its cluster of pontoons and the picturesque port below the historic Lewis Castle, aiming to tap into the growing west coast sailing market and encourage more yachtsmen to explore the outer hebodies. Demand is already surging well beyond expectations, which is a scenario that the harbour board predicted would not happen for another three years. Some 70 berths are now available, including 43 spaces for larger yachts, which proved very successful and very popular last summer. That was closely followed by the Lachmadi yacht marina in North East, which was built by Common Nomara or the Society of the Sea, which is the first body in the UK to secure local management agreement for community control of a section of the seabed from the Crown Estate. The Crown Estate has to be commended for the way in which it is engaging with local bodies to benefit the local economies. I am sure that we can expect more of the same when management of the Crown Estate is transferred to Scotland and that is something that the Iraqi committee will be taking evidence on tomorrow morning when we have the Crown Estate before us. Following on from these successes, a local community group plans to build a £1.3 million marina facility and floating pontoons in Tarbot Harris and Scalpy if an application to the Scottish Government's coastal community fund is successful. There are lots of exciting projects recently completed or planned. While I am waxing lyrical about the Western Isles, I better return to my constituency. Grangemouth, Bones and Black Ness have already well-established yachts and boating clubs. Arguably, those are under-supported. If the Scottish Government is committed to improving marine tourism, it may wish to consider the first of fourth becoming a hub for boating on the east coast. That could improve links to mainland Europe and the Nordic region, as well as better connectivity with other east coast marine activities and my constituency to link it up with the canal network. Although I have to say, I am worried to hear reports that Swedes are being advised not to take their yachts into Scotland's lowland canals as they badly need dredged and some boats have been known to get stuck. It is maybe not the best advert when trying to attract Nordic boat owners with a high disposable income. I would hope that the minister takes on board this issue, and if there is ever any underspend, then some resources towards dredging our canals would be most welcome. In closing, I feel that any marine tourism initiative is missing a great asset if it does not use our canals to link tourism between the Clyde and the Forth. The mix of boundaries, local authorities, development plans and conflicting demands can make for a challenging planning environment, but the benefits to our national tourist trade and the improvement to the quality of the tourist experience far outweith us. In summary, it is fair to say that, despite the challenges that we have heard about this afternoon, it all seems to be heading in the right direction. Many thanks, Richard Baker, to be forward by Richard Brody. This has been an afternoon of consensual debates in the chamber, and it is certainly right that we have found consensus around the motion tabled by the minister today on marine tourism. As Graham Pearson said, this afternoon's debate has indeed dovetailed neatly. I will be talking about the work of our harbors and the important contribution that they can make to marine tourism as well. It is right for the Scottish Government to recognise the importance of the opportunities of marine tourism, not least for our economy and particularly for the north-east. I am sure that Aberdeen harbour will have been referred to in a previous debate on harbors, on the harbors bill. I will return to Aberdeen harbour and plans there later on, but I also want to discuss the importance of Aberdeen Shire's harbors to the local economies of the region. Often in economies locally where it would be much more difficult to stimulate local employment, particularly in the aftermath of some of the decommissioning in fishing, but there we have a very positive story in terms of the development of marine tourism. There has been a great deal of investment in harbors in Aberdeen Shire to enable them to capitalise on the opportunities for marine and coastal tourism. It is well worth making the point, particularly in the context of the current political debates across the country, that a great deal of the funding has come from European Union funding streams. The Aberdeenshire European Fisheries Fund programme funded 26 projects to a value of nearly £700,000. That was important support for the region and for our coastal communities. It resulted in funding for a number of different projects, including the Peterhead heritage trail, the seafood festival and trail, linking marine tourism with the north-east's great reputation for food as well, and other projects such as the Banff coast tourism development programme. The Banff marina was established in 2003, when the local community identified the need for a marina to boost the harbors' attraction to the growing tourist trade. The marina now provides a 76 berth, not just at Banff but in McDuff and other harbors. There has been important investment as well, but there is always a potential to do more to obtain even greater benefits from marine tourism for local communities. I know that there are calls to invest further in a Rosearty harbour to improve the harbour there, and to develop further the coastal walk between Fraserborough and Rosearty. I am sure that that would be beneficial in terms of marine tourism for the north-east as well. As Lewis MacDonald referred to in his speech, there are exciting plans for Aberdeen harbour 2, which would be of huge benefit to marine tourism in the north-east, with the £320 million plans to upgrade Aberdeen's Nyg bay harbour to accommodate cruise ships, and plans supported by Aberdeen City Council and Scottish Enterprise. I hope that they will therefore receive strong support from ministers as well. Of course, Lewis MacDonald also rightly set out challenges as well for ministers, even in the debate of consensus. It is important to do that. Firstly, on beach quality, which is of course vital to attract more people to our beaches and our coastal communities, and also on the issue of new powers through the devolution of the Crown Estate, it is right to argue for those powers to be located in local communities themselves. The example of Banff Marina, where the need was identified locally to make the development there, is an example of why it is right to devolve those powers beyond Hollywood and into local communities themselves. Of course, there remains more work to do to promote marine tourism in Scotland, but it is good that the Scottish Government has identified that as an important area of work, and it is right to recognise what is already being done to capitalise on the great natural resources that we have, the beauty of our coastline, the attraction of our beaches and the fantastic facilities that we more and more have in our harbours across our coast as well, so that we capitalise on the opportunities that they give us, and we encourage even more people to visit and enjoy Scotland's coast in the future. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am delighted to be speaking in this debate this afternoon, but having spoken in the previous debate on harbours, I am beginning to feel like Parahandy. Please no comment on vital spark. Scotland's tourism industry under the leadership of this Government has grown significantly over the past few years, and we all want to see Scotland become one of the more accessible tourist destinations, providing high quality and value for money and memorable customer experiences. Our marine industry currently contributes something like £4.5 billion to the Scottish economy, part of which, of course, is in marine tourism. It is a market sector that can attract and tends to attract high spending individuals and groups, and it is a market that fits well with other parts of our tourist offerings such as food and drink. Scotland has the longest coastline in Europe. We know that it has breathtaking coastal scenery and great views from the water. Marine tourism has to take into consideration the part that plays in sustaining the environment. National Marine Plan was published in March 2015, covering 900 separate islands with varying habitats and a diverse array of 6,500 species. Of course, sitting alongside it comfortably was the strategic framework for the marine tourism strategy, rightly called Awakening the Giant, because marine tourism contributes £360 million to our economy, hoping that it will rise to £450 million by 2020. As Graham Pearson mentioned, sailing alone is worth £101 million in the plan aims to increase that by £145 million by 2020. Nearly 46,000 workers are employed within the overall marine sector, many of them in the marine tourism sector. The strategy aims to boost Scotland's reputation as a world-class marine tourism destination by improving experiences for visitors and building new facilities and promoting new and existing events. I daresay that the minister omitted to mention golf tourism with opens appearing along the coast of Fife next month and along the coast of Ayrshire, the women's open at Ternbury, this year and the open at Trun in 2016. The reason I omitted reference to golf tourism is that it is not normally a marine event. The minister has obviously not seen me play golf across a pond. Europe has recognised the value of the sector, and I mentioned in the previous debate the 10T investment programme for improving our harbours and ports, which can only aid and abet our tourism strategy. Mention has been made of the cruise liner industry and the great potential that it has. We know that, having had conversations with those that are involved in the industry in Florida, they are probably going largely out of the Middle East and looking for alternatives. In 2012, we believed that 500 cruise liners went into Copenhagen in that year, while only 50 came into Edinburgh. As has been said, there is huge potential to encourage jobs and investment. It is also the year of food and drink in 2015, and we can build upon that by encouraging more visitors to shops and restaurants as they come from ship on to the shore. All of that only adds to our image as a country that can attract and manage big events, as we have had last year, and to drive a cup in common with games. We can also do individual activities such as fishing, not dredging, but fishing for inshore for things such as scalps and prawns. Let me look very quickly at an example closer to home. We all know the potential that Breswick has in regard to its airport and its potential spaceport. It sits comfortably alongside Tune. I spoke today in the harbours bill that gave us the opportunity to encourage investment in our ports and harbours. That would include investment in harbours and ports and marine facilities that could be aligned to air facilities. Combining all that with the reduction of air passenger duty, you can see the potential for drawing marine and air tourism together. I commend the plan to encourage whomsoever that will sail into our harbours, who will engage in water sports, who will enjoy diving and seeing that Scotland is as beautiful under the water as it is above it. Thank you, Mr Brodie. We now move to the wind-up speeches. Can I call on Jimmy McGregor? Around four minutes, Mr McGregor. Thank you. There have been some good speeches across the chamber. I wish to commend Stuart McMillan once again for the good work that he has done in convening the Scottish Parliament's cross-party group on recreational boating and marine tourism, of which I am a member. There have been some very good illustrations of how important sea angling is at that cross-party group. A number of members referred to sea angling, and I agree with the sentiments that they expressed on it. As we have heard, the Scottish Government's 2009 economic impact of recreational sea angling in Scotland report set out just how much income the industry brings in. I am delighted that this year's European Boat and Line class sea angling championships will once again return to strong nests in Orkney during the first week of August. These were last held in Orkney in 2009, and the chairman of the European Federation of Sea Anglers, Mr Horst Schneider, has described that as an unforgettable event, producing an amazing 4,227 fish, including ling, pollock, cod, spur dog, and others over the four competition days. I wish all the competitors tight lines in this year's championships, and I hope many more international sea angling competitions can be held in Scotland, as these do provide huge boosts to the local economies. Marine wildlife watching is also very important, especially in my region of the Highlands and Islands. One third of the whale population of the North Atlantic migrates through the waters around the Hebrides each year, and companies like Hebride and Whale Cruises offer fantastic opportunities to see these beautiful creatures. Seafari, Oban and Sky, another company, also offer fascinating marine wildlife boat trips, and you can also be taken to see the Gulf of Corry of Wrecken, home of the world's third largest whirlpool. You don't want to go there in the wrong conditions, I can assure you. I've done it myself. There are also a number of companies offering trips to see the Murray first population of bottlenose dolphins. Now the role of Scotland's canals, again, were mentioned today, and again I recognise the very significant income they help bring to my region through the tourism associated with the Caledonian Canal and the Crinon Canal. Earlier this month in the chamber I took part and was very pleased to do so in Dave Thompson's Members' Debate about the Caledonian Canal, and following that debate where I highlighted calls for additional moorings to be provided throughout the canal, I was contacted by constituent Dave Eads, Chairman of the Great Glen Canal Users Association. Mr Eads is also keen to see additional moorings provided, but points out that the Government's support for Scottish canals has remained frozen at around 10 million per annum, which in real terms is reducing steadily. Given the number of visitors our canals attract, this seems very good value for money. Would the Government consider additional one-off payments to provide additional moorings to expand capacity, because that seems to be what people are asking for? Perhaps the Minister might wish to comment on this in his closing remarks. To conclude, Presiding Officer, we support the ambitions to grow Scotland's marine tourism sector, and we look to the Scottish Government and local authorities to do whatever they can to support our marine tourism businesses, especially in the provision of infrastructure, which is crucial if we are going to meet our growth targets. Support for marketing the excellent marine tourism activities that we have in Scotland is crucial and must go on. We have heard today a good debate about the wide variety of attractions and activities in Scotland, which come under the marine tourism umbrella, and about the strategy that is developing to grow that diversity even more. We have heard, too, that partnership is vital to the success of the strategy, and that there are many ways that the different organisations within the sector can work together to promote Scotland and increase visitor numbers. Our amendment highlights the growth of ecotourism and the importance of environmental standards in encouraging nature lovers and water sports enthusiasts, among others, to take advantage of our natural environment. Yes, there are issues to be addressed, but as Graham Pearson illustrated, Scotland has much to celebrate in the quality of our environment. It is sometimes more obvious to visitors from afar, like the consul general of China, than it is to ourselves. Stuart McMillan highlighted, I think, very importantly the contribution of this Parliament's cross-party group to development of the sector strategy and to the relevant parts of the national marine plan. That is also something to celebrate. It is what this Parliament on a cross-party basis aspires to do, demonstrating the added value that an effective cross-party group can bring with the right leadership and the right sense of purpose in making a link between the Parliament and the wider economy and society. A number of members have highlighted the central importance of sailing to our marine tourism strategy, and there is surely, I think, scope to explore the potential for longer-distance sailors and yachtsmen and women coming to Scotland, not as a mass market in itself, but as a means of promoting Scotland's many attractions to audiences in other countries. Angus MacDonald's comments on the success of marinas in Stornoway and Lachmadi reflect the potential. I was lucky enough to visit St Kilda a few years ago, courtesy of a Harris skipper by the name of Angus Campbell. He showed the quality of his own seamanship when the seas turned a little choppy on the way home to Libreborough. What was fascinating was the sheer number of other people making their own way to Scotland's remotest islands. The St Kilda island group is 50 miles west of Harris and, of course, it justifies a visit in its own right. However, it is also an obvious attraction to Atlantic sailors in general. There are, as has been mentioned, leisure sailors from Scandinavia and the Baltic who head for the warm waters of the Caribbean every so often and who might be attracted to spend some time in Scotland on the way there or back. If we are to develop the full potential of our sailing economy, we should go beyond the desirable objective of providing good facilities for weekend sailors from Britain and Ireland. Important though those are, short haul trips will continue to be the bread and butter, but the extra added value of appearing on global itineraries is worth pursuing vigorously. The strategic framework for marine tourism recognises the actual and potential importance of the near abroad, such as Scandinavia, Germany and the Netherlands. However, it describes Russia, for instance, as more of long-term interests due to the challenges posed by geography and transport links. While growing up in Lewis and living now in Aberdeen, I have never been inclined to think of the eastern Baltic or Arctic ports as a long way away. I think that there may be more future potential in leisure business from those directions than we have yet begun to measure. I hope that the minister will agree that our harbors, marinas and canals can help to attract such long-distance business as well with a positive approach. Angus MacDonald made an important point about the need for all our canals to be properly dredged if they are to attract ocean-going yachts, and that is an issue that I hope can be addressed. Liam McArthur and others talked about more noble forms of marine tourism and cutting-edge businesses such as those that are represented by Wild Scotland have tapped into the potential of the growing ecotourism market. Dolphin discovery days and wild river writings are only some of the most obvious water-borne attractions that will appeal to all the family while they are staying in accommodation, specifically designed to have the lowest possible impact on the environment. Our landscape and waterscape are ideally suited to activities such as whitewater rafting, deep-sea diving and outdoor swimming. Facilities such as knock-burn sports, locked in your bankery, address the rising interest in such sports, creating an environment where outdoor swimmers can practice in safety, even though they are miles from the open sea. The point is that marine tourism is not a separate business in a silo safely compartmentalised away from the tourism industry on dry land. All the activities that visitors can enjoy in freshwater have their counterparts in the seawater environment, and they all add up to a very attractive offer for outdoor holiday fans from Scotland, from the rest of the islands and from further afield. We also heard about the value of the Scottish economy of ocean cruise ships, which are a long-established feature of global tourism and many of which find the way to Scottish shores. It is not just the Clyde which Stuart McMillan mentioned, which attracts those ships, but also, as Richard Baker mentioned, places around the north-east coast and in the northern isles. Aberdein harbour board is building a whole new port in Nygbae, part of the purpose of which is to bring more cruise ships with thousands of passengers to land in Scotland with obvious benefits for the wider economy. I communicate with those ocean-going liners that have very different businesses from a marina for coastal sailors, but just as marine tourism can benefit from a wider interest in the ocean in Scotland, our coast must be geared to take all kinds of leisure vessels, great and small. It is important to recognise the connections within marine tourism and the connections from there to other sectors. Government working in partnership should and will, I hope, encourage innovation and imagination in the way that those businesses grow. If we can combine an adventurous spirit with careful support for our natural environment, I believe that the future for marine tourism in Scotland can be very bright indeed. Thank you, Ms MacDonald. Can I invite the minister to wind up the debate? Minister, till 5 o'clock, and I would be obliged. Thank you, Presiding Officer. May I thank all of the members who have contributed this afternoon for what has been, I think, the most harmonious debate that I can recall for a very long time indeed, and perhaps that is because we are debating largely what happens at sea. It does seem that, when we are debating what occurs on land that such harmony is more elusive. Perhaps the moral of the story is that perhaps debates maritime should occur more of the time, or perhaps it is a reflection that the lure of the deep blue sea is very strong for many of us who have spoken in the debate. I am certainly happy to do so. Leah MacArthur? I certainly agree with the minister that there has been a consensual debate, but I think that his memory may be playing tricks on him. He is a veteran of previous debates on December fisheries councils. I think that he will recall that some of those have been less than harmonious in the past. Minister? I was trying to forget them, but Mr MacArthur has just made that slightly more difficult. To be fair, I think that it has been an informative, informed and useful, valuable debate on a relatively new area of activity. I am delighted that many members from all parties paid tribute to the work that Stuart MacMillan has been leading. He has gone beyond the call of duty in the cross-party chair, and has put his whole heart and soul into it. I was delighted that so many members paid tribute to that. There were three calls for additional money, none of which I am afraid I will be exceeding to just on the spot. However, I will certainly come back to members, provided they are willing to drop me a note and give a little bit more detail, because I think that they did not have time to develop their points. Liam MacArthur and the hyperbaric centres and coaches, and that is a serious issue that I am very well aware of, is the dredging of canals by Angus MacDonald. I certainly was not aware of that as a problem that was deterring Swedes from coming to Scotland, but you learn something new every day. I think that the additional moorings point that Jamie MacGregor made is that we will check the official report to see if I have missed any. I want to refer to some of the contributions and respond to some specific questions that were asked. Lewis MacDonald raised the concerns of the fishermen on the west coast, although it is perhaps not directly relevant to the debate. Nonetheless, it is an extremely serious topic, which I know well, from the days when I represented Lochaber and engaged regularly with the Malig and North West Fishmans Association, Clyde and indeed the Hebrides. I know that Richard Lochhead will of course continue to engage appropriately with all of those representatives on a very serious matter. Stuart McMillan raised the campaign for the QE2, and I think that Inverclyde councillor has written to be in that. I think that we need to establish whether the vessel is for sale or not before any consideration of purchase could be acquired. Call me a lawyer, but it does seem to be an important piece of research that we need to gain. He is right to raise what would plainly be an iconic attraction for Scotland. The Royal York Britannia on the east coast provides that role, and therefore the QE2 in the west coast would be appropriate. I am sure that we will look into that with a sympathetic manner. Jamie McGregor raised the question of costs and the costs of the Crown estate post-evolution, and I was aware of the publicity. I have seen it and followed it. In the strategy, to be fair, it says that our ambitions are to provide an excellent marine tourism destination with value for money being applied. I know that Richard Lochhead, in writing to Mr McGregor in February, stated that it is important that, in the transfer of the Crown estate, we retain key staff expertise and do not affect investor confidence. I hope that those comments provide a measure of assurance to Jamie McGregor. I inform Richard Baker that I am delighted to say regarding the cool routes that Glasgow Caledonian University is Scottish partners for the cool routes initiative, with involvement from the Blue Seas marina based in Greenock. I also say in response to Stuart McMillan that I have never met a cadre of more enthusiastic people who provide a welcome to visitors to Scotland than the volunteers who work at Greenock at the terminal there. They are excellent. I think that Annabel Goldie has raised this in another way. I am very happy to take an intervention, which I think unexpectedly to her she is now going to make. Annabel Goldie, you could just shout. Well, it does show how excellent our education is, as I am sure we will hear from our education spokesperson tomorrow at First Minister's question time, but there is no end to the bonomy that is broken out this afternoon in this chamber. I also say to Liam MacArthur that I was delighted to pay a further visit to Orkney fairly recently at the Convention of the Highlands and Islands. In the course of that, I learned, amongst other things, in addition to Highland Park, that Scapa, the other excellent whisky that is distilled in the Orkney Islands, has now established a visitor centre. That is a key destination for the thousands of people that visit Kirkwall from the cruise liners. Indeed, I had the pleasure of playing hooky for about 30 minutes from the co-he official proceedings to meander along the main street of Kirkwall and see some of the excellent shops and the establishments that provide sources of entertainment to visitors to that excellent place. Can I say that the strategy document itself, as Chick Brody quite rightly pointed out, is not just rhetoric, it is not just highfalutin words and ideas, it also sets out a number of key actions on providing authentic experiences to develop a comprehensive list of marine and related events to identify opportunities and gaps within the calendar to align and link regional and international events further to cross-sell events and capture the wider economic and community impact and benefits to develop a sport-specific event strategy for the sector to build on the successive events such as the Scottish series, to secure two international events by 220, for example, tall ships, Volvo ocean race event, to revisit the river festival in Clyde fortnight and ensure the co-ordination of the wide variety of regional and local events. Also, in respect of improving the customer journey, which again Chick Brody referred to, planning improved facilities for booking, improved marine hosting arrangements and improved digital landscape, the strategy document has brought together the whole sector in a way that has never happened before and I'm told that it wasn't always an easy challenge to be overcome because the sector hadn't used to been working together and indeed there were differences but they have all been brought together and I mentioned extracts from this strategy document because it is not just a high level strategy it sets out a plan for action that we can take. Presiding Officer, in conclusion, this has been a most enjoyable, harmonious and at times jubilant debate where an area crossword of controversy has been spoken, a somewhat rare event as I remarked earlier. We have, in the course of the afternoon, travelled widely and extensively from Argyll to Orkney, from Aberdeen to Arran via Greenock, whether we wanted to or not. Of course I wanted to but I was just offering members the opportunity to take a different view. We narrowly avoided seeing Jamie McGregor immersed in the Corry of Wreck and Poo and we're very pleased about that. We missed spotting Nessie but we did and it's a matter of compensation thanks to Lee McArthur. We managed to identify Orca and therefore, whilst you cannot have everything in life, the really important things come to you if you work hard enough. In conclusion, Presiding Officer, I exhort all my colleagues in this chamber to holiday in Scotland this year, whether it be for a week of fortnight or even a weekend. Take your families to some of the finest locations in the world, have a marvellous time, take your bucket and spade and deploy them to the foal. Minister, thank you. That concludes the debate on marine tourism. We now move to decision time. There are three questions to be put as a result of today's business. The first question is that motion number 13511, in the name of Derek Mackay, on the Harbour Scotland Bill, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed to. The next question is that amendment number 13510.1, in the name of Lewis MacDonald, which seeks to amend motion number 13510, in the name of Fergus Ewing, on marine tourism, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? That amendment is also agreed to. The next question is that motion number 13510, in the name of Fergus Ewing, as amended, on marine tourism, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed to. That concludes decision time. We now move to members' business. Members who leave the chamber should do so quickly and quietly.