I was pleased to secure an opportunity to debate fishery management issues with the fishing minister this week (Wednesday, March 26).

As we’re nearly a quarter way into 2025, the pattern of catch against quota/catch allowance has more clear, and so I’m requesting reasonable adjustments to better reflect the reality of the state of the stock and to base catch limits on the best science. For example, pollack remains a bycatch only fishery, meaning that no one (other than recreational anglers!) are permitted to target the fish, though it’s impossible to avoid them in Cornwall’s highly mixed fishing waters. This has caused a significant challenge for the inshore and offshore Cornish fleet since the start of last year. A compensation payment was offered to some vessels in 2024, which helped ease the financial issues some businesses faced. Nothing has yet been discussed to support them in 2025, despite boats now facing a further cut in the bycatch allowance this year. As a result, the strain on these businesses has never been greater.

The restrictions on pollack are due to an ongoing zero total allowable catch advice from the International Council for the exploration of the Seas (ICES). So, some boats which are trying their best to avoid catching pollack may be prevented from fishing, because the pollack stock appears to be more healthy and abundant than the science previously estimated.

Then there’s Dover sole, which is a high-value species within the mixed fishery. However, the administrative zones it’s split into ignore that it’s migratory. Where there’s good knowledge there’s a healthy quota and where the science is limited a precautionary limited quota is applied. In those areas other fisheries (e.g. for megrim and monk fish) risk being closed for the same reason — i.e. that too many dover sole are being caught as a by catch, as the stock is more healthy than the limited estimate anticipated.

These and other matters will be explored with the Minister.

This week I’ve been asked by constituent, Tina Nash, to go public about my support for her and my request to the Justice Secretary to appeal the decision to move the perpetrator of the horrific attack on her 14 years ago to an open prison. As this paper has reported, Tina was the victim of extreme and traumatic domestic abuse/violence, including that she was held hostage, beaten, strangled, had both eyes gouged out and had her nose and jaw broken. The perpetrator was sentenced to life in prison in 2012, with a minimum jail term of 6 years.

I have always held that the primary purpose of prison is public protection, and that any person capable of such appalling violence should be locked up until they are physically incapable to harming anyone, even a fly. I stand with Tina and indeed anyone else who faces or has faced intimidation, threats and in extreme cases like hers, appalling acts of violence.