All Advisory Group members of the Clyde Inshore Fisheries Group (IFG) will be getting a copy of the latest draft management plan ‘by close of play’ on Friday 29th July 2011.
This is the notice considered adequate for a one week consultation process starting two days later, on 31st July and banging off the meetings at the rate of one a night for five days, with each meeting scheduled for no more than one and a half hours.
And these members are not even expected to be present at the meetings to be held next week – which are ‘only’ for fishermen and the public – oddly enough, those most affected by whatever is finally sent forwards.
The procedure of the meetings
They say:
‘… disk copies of the plan will be available at each meetingtogether with paper copies of the more relevant sections of the draft Plan. Attendees will be asked to complete a consultation proforma to formally record any comments they may have and these comments will subsequently be collated and disseminated to both the Clyde IFG Executive Committee and the Advisory Group. It is likely that at this point we will also call an Executive Committee meeting to consider signing- off our Plan for formal approval to Marine Scotland. We will also consult again with the Advisory Group and if members feel that a meeting is necessary this will be arranged.’
This is not a remotely serious process.
It lends weight to the recently voiced description of ‘consultation’ as no more than ‘a declaration of intent’.
The Scottish Government should realise that this is a wholly discredited process – whichever issue it is applied to – and that if it is serious about the very notion of ;consultation’ ot needs to take immediate and clearly determined action to rescue the credibility of this procedure.
It has no public credibility for good reason.
When we attended and reported on a consultation session in Inveraray on Scottish Marine Regions, we were left with causes for real concern.
The intelligence quotient of the argument of that draft, the organisation of the information it contained and the utterly amateur incompetence of the ‘questionnaire’ sections were all far below what one is entitled to expect from work set at this level and on an issue of this magnitude.
We can only hope that there has been a sea change in capability in this general field of consultation between then and now – because the procedure is the same.
The schedule
The formal public consultation on the Clyde IFG (draft) Management Plan is about to undertake what are described as ‘public surgeries’ over five days of next week, ‘to allow stakeholders to view and comment on our Plan’.
The dates and venues for these meetings are:
- Sunday 31st July, Inveraray: Loch Fyne Hotel, 6pm-7.30 pm
- Monday 1st August, Tarbert: Anchor Hotel, 6pm-7.30 pm
- Tuesday 2nd August, Arran: Auchrannie hotel, 6pm-7.30 pm
- Wednesday, 3rd August, Ayr: Citadel Leisure Centre, 4pm-5.30pm
- Thursday, 4th August, Stranraer: Millennium Centre, 6pm-7.30pm.
Since notice is short, we suggest that people reading this inform others they know to be interested.
At the meetings
Coordinator, Alex. Watson Crook will be at each session as will Dr. Billy Sinclair, Chair of the IFG.
Members of the Clyde IFG Executive Committee may in some instances, also attend.
They say that: ‘The meetings will be informal, with the aim being to encourage feedback on our draft Plan, both from any individual fishermen that wish to attend and from wider members of the public.’
From our observation of the Scottish Marine Regions consultation session – also designed ‘to encourage feedback’ – this element was an improperly ‘leading’ process, with ill-framed questions and ill-managed responses to critical opinions.
These were actually reworded in the hearing of the person who had uttered them so that they could be recorded within the spectrum of desired views.
This is where caveat emptor comes in.
Members of the Advisory Group
- Marine Scotland- Science
- Marine Scotland- Compliance
- Scottish Natural Heritage
- Scottish Environment Protection Agency
- RSPB (Representing Environmental Link Network)
- Ayrshire Council (Ayrshire Joint Planning Unit)
- Argyll & Bute Council
- Crown Estate
- Food Standards Agency
- Clydeport Authority
- Seafish
- Seafood-Scotland.
- Scottish Sea Angling Conservation Network
- University Marine Laboratory – Millport
Representatives from these organisations are unlikely to be present.
Just a word of caution. We are dealing with the exploitation of a natural renewable resource. In these situations the industry should fit the environment and not the environment fit the industry and subsequent plans should be centred on the environment and not the industry. The industry form should be such that it can thrive off the annual interest generated from the resource and not damage the capital of that resource. This means that certain forms of exploitation are not acceptable as they destroy the seabed. In this case the role of government should be to provide the mechanism to bridge the movement of unacceptable forms of exploitation to those that are acceptable. if the government can provide the appropriate strategic framework then local resources should be under local control so that the quality of life of these communities should be dependent upon the existence of a diverse natural resource functioning at its best. But it is the existence of the diverse natural resource functioning at its best that should be the foundation of any ‘industry’.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0