Recommendations & Conclusions
8 items
2
Recommendation
7th Report – Resetting the relationship…
Acknowledged
The government should provide this Committee with the analysis supporting the £360 million funding level, the 12-year duration and whatever the profile of this spending is expected to be over that period, including the reasons for establishing a new scheme rather than building on existing ones. It should also set …
Read more
The government should provide this Committee with the analysis supporting the £360 million funding level, the 12-year duration and whatever the profile of this spending is expected to be over that period, including the reasons for establishing a new scheme rather than building on existing ones. It should also set out its rationale for integrating community investment and define measurable longterm outcomes for growth, resilience and competitiveness to enable a proper assessment of progress over the lifespan of the Fund. (Recommendation, Paragraph 8)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government welcomes interest in the Fund and states its design is informed by evidence and engagement, with a commitment to using clear and measurable criteria to achieve its objectives. However, it does not explicitly provide the detailed analysis, spending profile, or rationale for the …
Read full response →
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs
3
Conclusion
7th Report – Resetting the relationship…
Acknowledged
The government clearly recognises the strong relationship between fishing activity and coastal community wellbeing. Evidence shows that challenges such as inadequate port infrastructure and limited skills and training pathways require targeted support to sustain active fishing communities. The Fund’s priorities for its first year reflect this need. However, from the …
Read more
The government clearly recognises the strong relationship between fishing activity and coastal community wellbeing. Evidence shows that challenges such as inadequate port infrastructure and limited skills and training pathways require targeted support to sustain active fishing communities. The Fund’s priorities for its first year reflect this need. However, from the second year, the Fund will cover a broader set of priorities and delivery will not be limited to the current Fisheries and Seafood Scheme (FaSS) framework administered by the Marine Management Organisation. (Conclusion, Paragraph 9)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government acknowledges the conclusion by confirming it is developing future plans for the Fund from year two onwards, which will establish a broader range of spending options beyond the current FaSS framework through stakeholder engagement and an Expert Advisory Group.
Read full response →
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs
7
Recommendation
7th Report – Resetting the relationship…
Acknowledged
We welcome the scale of engagement carried out in developing the Fund and note clear evidence that stakeholder views have informed its early design, such as the introduction of competitive rounds in the first year of the fund. However, there were significant gaps in representation that must be addressed in …
Read more
We welcome the scale of engagement carried out in developing the Fund and note clear evidence that stakeholder views have informed its early design, such as the introduction of competitive rounds in the first year of the fund. However, there were significant gaps in representation that must be addressed in future engagement exercises. (Conclusion, Paragraph 16)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government acknowledges the importance of engagement, stating the Fund's design continues to be informed by sustained engagement with the sector and an Expert Advisory Group. It indicates that future plans are being developed based on this ongoing engagement but does not detail how specific …
Read full response →
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs
11
Conclusion
7th Report – Resetting the relationship…
Acknowledged
It is not credible for any devolved administration to demand devolution of a scheme and then to complain about the financial consequences of them being given what they asked for. It is difficult not to see this as a demand that was driven by the politics of the constitution rather …
Read more
It is not credible for any devolved administration to demand devolution of a scheme and then to complain about the financial consequences of them being given what they asked for. It is difficult not to see this as a demand that was driven by the politics of the constitution rather than effective fisheries management. (Conclusion, Paragraph 23)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government explains that devolution of the Fund was in response to Devolved Governments' requests and priorities, detailing the £56 million allocated to Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. It reaffirms commitment to working constructively with Devolved Governments and outlines the renewal of the £1.5 million …
Read full response →
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs
13
Conclusion
7th Report – Resetting the relationship…
Acknowledged
Trust between government and the fishing industry has been damaged by successive administrations. Rebuilding that trust is essential if the sector is to deliver its full economic potential for the individuals and communities it supports. Fishers are calling for a stronger voice in the decisions that affect them. Although the …
Read more
Trust between government and the fishing industry has been damaged by successive administrations. Rebuilding that trust is essential if the sector is to deliver its full economic potential for the individuals and communities it supports. Fishers are calling for a stronger voice in the decisions that affect them. Although the government has acknowledged the importance of partnership and communication in developing resilience within the sector, the perception among fishers is that this is not happening in practice. (Conclusion, Paragraph 27)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government acknowledges the committee's observation regarding damaged trust and the need for stronger engagement with the fishing industry. It claims that close sector working is already embedded and engagement approaches are strengthened, committing to further evolve and improve stakeholder engagement and invest in face-to-face …
Read full response →
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs
15
Conclusion
7th Report – Resetting the relationship…
Acknowledged
We welcome Defra’s trials of regional seafood planning in England, but more benefits will arise if the scope and participation of the trials are broadened to better capture the full range of perspectives from fishing communities and the wider seafood sector. This will enable policy to be shaped more effectively …
Read more
We welcome Defra’s trials of regional seafood planning in England, but more benefits will arise if the scope and participation of the trials are broadened to better capture the full range of perspectives from fishing communities and the wider seafood sector. This will enable policy to be shaped more effectively around the realities and needs of those it affects. (Conclusion, Paragraph 29)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government acknowledges the importance of broader participation by detailing the strengthened role of Regional Fisheries Groups for inshore fleet engagement. It also highlights trials of new engagement approaches, such as a workshop in St Ives, and is exploring holding more such events to involve …
Read full response →
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs
17
Conclusion
7th Report – Resetting the relationship…
Acknowledged
Communication and engagement with the fishing industry on the outcomes of the annual UK–EU consultations for 2026 regarding changes to technical measures were inadequate, with unclear messaging on implementation timelines and confusion even among delivery bodies. This has left industry without reliable information on changes that directly affect their operations. …
Read more
Communication and engagement with the fishing industry on the outcomes of the annual UK–EU consultations for 2026 regarding changes to technical measures were inadequate, with unclear messaging on implementation timelines and confusion even among delivery bodies. This has left industry without reliable information on changes that directly affect their operations. (Conclusion, Paragraph 32)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government acknowledges the committee's scrutiny regarding communication of UK-EU consultation outcomes, defending its past engagement under urgent and confidential conditions. It commits to building on its approach for future technical measures in the Channel and Irish Sea, ensuring clear communication and support for stakeholders.
Read full response →
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs
23
Conclusion
7th Report – Resetting the relationship…
Acknowledged
Spatial squeeze poses significant and growing challenges, with an increasing number of sectors competing for limited marine space. Although initiatives such as the MSPri programme are intended to inform cross- departmental policy and planning, the absence of any reference to fishing or environmental protection in the North Sea Future Plan, …
Read more
Spatial squeeze poses significant and growing challenges, with an increasing number of sectors competing for limited marine space. Although initiatives such as the MSPri programme are intended to inform cross- departmental policy and planning, the absence of any reference to fishing or environmental protection in the North Sea Future Plan, despite its ambition to support a prosperous and sustainable future for the region, shows that this approach is failing. Confirmation that the MSPri programme was not used in the development of the Plan, despite being explicitly referenced within it, further undermines confidence in the purpose and effectiveness 30 of the programme. The MSPri programme is of little value if it is not used consistently, or at all, across departments when planning activity in the marine environment. (Conclusion, Paragraph 50)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government commits to finding appropriate ways to improve overall transparency for the MSPri programme but rejects the need for an addendum to the North Sea Future Plan, stating the NSFP already acknowledges MSPri's role in considering future demands on marine space.
Read full response →
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs