No one who has been a member of the Parliament
The parasite Gyrodactylus salaris—I pronounce its name publicly for the first time—is one of the biggest threats that could conceivably enter our rivers. I was especially impressed with the way in which Richard Lochhead made that point. Not only would GS be a great threat to our wild salmon populations and the economic development associated with them, the process of flushing out some of our rivers with dangerous chemicals could be a massive threat to our whisky industry. Considering the exports that our whisky industry achieves, we cannot afford to take risks.
I wonder whether, when we discuss biosecurity and GS—and, perhaps, bird flu and foot-and-mouth disease, which we have often discussed in the same context—it is sometimes difficult to assess how dangerous the situation would be and what reaction would be appropriate. I worry that we may be observing complacency, to some extent, in relation to GS. Time will tell. If GS does appear, perhaps complacency is what we will have seen.
The use of live bait was passed over quickly in the debate, but I am glad that we had the opportunity to debate it. I am not convinced that we have made the right decision, but I have been given cause to reflect on how the Executive used the same biosecurity arguments against the use of live bait.
We must concern ourselves with how new people—especially those who can least afford to become involved in the sport of angling—can be given access to fishing. Various organisations in Scotland are working hard, in conjunction with our angling clubs, to achieve that. I am glad that we will preserve our angling clubs and not undermine their authority through decisions that we have made today.
It was interesting that a Conservative amendment provided the opportunity to test the concept of compulsory compensation when fish are compulsorily destroyed by the Executive. The fact that the Executive has taken a discretionary power to compensate for destroyed fish is a major