Queen of Sweden Proposed Historic Marine Protected Area (MPA) Partial Island Communities Impact Assessment (ICIA)

3. Step Three – Consultation

3.1 Who do you need to consult with?

Extensive engagement with a full range of stakeholders has been undertaken throughout the development of these proposals. Stakeholders engaged include the Shetland Marine Spatial Planning Advisory Group (now Shetland Islands Marine Planning Partnership), Lerwick Port Authority, the Shetland Shellfish Management Organisation and the Shetland Sub-Aqua Club.

3.2 How will you carry out your consultation and in what timescales?

3.2.1 Pre-consultation engagement

HES had pre-consultation engagement with stakeholders on this proposal through the Shetland Marine Spatial Planning Advisory Group (now Shetland Islands Marine Planning Partnership), with a presentation given to the forum membership on 25 July 2019. There were also follow-up bilateral discussions with the Lerwick Harbour Authority, the Shetland Shellfish Management Organisation and the Shetland Sub-Aqua Club. These discussions did not identify any significant issues.

3.2.2 HES consultation

HES undertook a public consultation on behalf of Scottish Ministers between 20 February and 17 April 2019. All parties with a potential interest in the proposal to designate the Queen of Sweden as an Historic MPA were invited to comment.

3.2.3 Scottish Government consultation

The Scottish Government held a 4-week consultation on these updated proposals between 30 October and 17 November 2019. Work on further progressing these proposals was paused due to resource reprioritisation brought about by coronavirus (COVID-19).

3.2.4 Post-consultation engagement

Work resumed on the proposals in late 2023. Given the period of time that had passed since the formal consultation Scottish Government officials reached out to those who had previously provided responses to see if their views had changed. Additional stakeholders were contacted who had not responded to the consultation but who it was felt may have an interest.

An online meeting has been held with Shetland Islands Planning Partnership, which included officials from Shetland Islands Council and the University of the Highlands and Islands.

Engagement has shown that there is a high degree of support for the proposed Queen of Sweden Historic MPA.

3.3 What questions will you ask when considering how to address island realities?

The formal Scottish Government consultation from 2019 asked respondents whether they supported the designation of the Queen of Sweden as an Historic MPA; whether they had any comments on the draft Designation Order; and whether they had any comments on the advice and consultation reports from HES. A BRIA was included as part of the consultation package which outlined potential socio-economic impacts. It should be noted that the formal consultation was carried out before the requirement to conduct an ICIA came into force in December 2020. This means that it did not include a draft ICIA or ask any questions specifically relating to particular impacts on island communities.

3.4 What information has already been gathered through consultations and what concerns have been raised previously by island communities?

The engagement and consultation conducted so far has demonstrated a significant degree of support in Shetland for the Queen of Sweden proposals. The HES consultation in early 2019 showed that 92% of respondents said they either ‘highly agree’ or ‘agree’ with the proposals. Of the 14 respondents to the Scottish Government consultation who specifically answered the question “Do you support the designation of the Queen of Sweden as a Historic MPA?”, nine were in support and the rest either expressed no view or did not object.

3.5 Is your consultation robust and meaningful and sufficient to comply with the Section 7 duty?

There has been extensive engagement with stakeholders throughout the development of these proposals, which have been amended to take into account feedback received. We are confident that consultation in relation to these proposals has been both robust and meaningful, particularly given that no significant adverse impacts have been identified.