In a report published today, the Parliament’s Rural Affairs committee expressed its dissatisfaction over the current arrangements which throw into doubt where Scotland ends and England begins.

Committee convener Alex Johnstone said:

"No one is disputing that the UK Government had to introduce a boundary to set out the limits of the jurisdiction of the Scottish Parliament in relation to the Scottish fishery zone. And while we understand that time may have been an issue in the run up to devolution, these measures were clearly not thought through.

"The Government assured us that this piece of legislation would affect only fisheries. But it is now clear that the decision could have implications for food safety and environment protection laws.

"Their legislation failed to take account of an existing boundary which defines the limits for other offshore activities, so we are left with the situation where we have two boundaries up to 60 miles apart.

"Today’s report highlights the illogical and confusing nature of this arrangement. This jurisdictional anomaly must be resolved. Otherwise it will remain unclear to fishermen operating in this disputed area which country’s legislation governs their activities.

"The committee recommends that the solution to this problem is for Westminster to redraw the fisheries boundary to match the existing civil jurisdiction limit governing other offshore activities."

The findings and conclusions of the report include that the committee:

1. accepts the need for definition of Scottish and English areas of the North Sea
2. is disappointed –

• at the level of consultation carried out prior to the introduction of the boundaries order
• that the introduction of a boundaries order appears not to have identified any inconsistency with the Civil Jurisdiction (Offshore Activities) Order 1987
• that the amount of fishing activity in the disputed area does not appear to have influenced the Order

3. accepts that the existence of two different boundaries between Scottish and English waters in the north sea could lead to confusion
4. accepts that a fishing boundary through the Berwick Bank fishing ground is inappropriate, and agrees that the line defined by the Civil Jurisdiction (Offshore Activities) Order 1987 should become the fisheries boundary
5. notes that the matter has now been reconsidered in detail and wishes to make known its dissatisfaction at the present situation whilst accepting that its resolution is reserved to the UK Parliament.
6. recommends that the Secretary of State introduce a new, revised Order, but notes that it is also open to the government to support a Bill calling for a revised boundary which is to be proposed in the House of Commons by Archy Kirkwood MP.

BACKGROUND NOTES

The two boundaries are effectively defined by two pieces of UK legislation:

• The Scottish Adjacent Waters Boundaries Order, 1999
• The Civil Jurisdiction (Offshore Activities) Order 1987

The committee’s membership is as follows:

John Munro, Alasdair Morgan, Alex Fergusson, Cathy Peattie, Alex Johnstone (convener), Irene McGugan, Elaine Murray, Mike Rumbles, Lewis Macdonald, Rhoda Grant and Richard Lochhead.

Media can obtain hard copies of the report from the Parliament’s Media Relations Office. The report is also available on the Parliament’s website.

Members of the public can buy copies of the report from outlets of The Stationery Office, priced £11.50.