Chamber and committees

Okay. If I can just wrap it up—

I recognise that. However, I am trying to flag up an issue. We have this route map and we are making changes, and we have to move towards, as I said, the objective of

“on-farm nature restoration, climate mitigation and adaptation”.

However, I meet farmers who are coming up against financial difficulties because they cannot do what they want to do. At this point, I am just flagging that up, and perhaps asking for reassurance from you that you will take the matter away and have a look at the Weeds Act 1959.

Otherwise, we will be building a house of cards. We have legislation that is out of date and we are passing SSIs to try to get cross-compliance, and we will find that that causes problems for people who want to move in the direction that the 2024 ARC act asks them to do.

He is the man for the job.

Yes, but we need to get underneath it, because we are basically building—

The conversation on the SSBSS has been very interesting. I would like to pick up on the good agricultural and environmental conditions scheme piece of the Scottish statutory instrument. I am not going to directly pursue this SSI, because I appreciate that it is improving the prevention of damage to peatlands and wetlands, but I will pursue the underlying legislation that the SSI is built on.

We just passed the 2024 ARC act—I love that we call it that—which includes, as an objective,

“the facilitation of on-farm nature restoration, climate mitigation and adaptation”.

In speaking to farmers, I have found that they want to move in that direction, but they bump into situations where they cannot get funding to do the things that they want to do on nature restoration because the funding schemes have not caught up.

The specific SSI that we are discussing, and the GAEC—good agricultural and environmental conditions—scheme in particular, build on the Weeds Act 1959. The 1959 act mentions a number of plants that are now recognised as beneficial. In 1959, they were weeds, and we had to get rid of them, but we now recognise that they are important for soil biology. Those plants include, for example, spear thistle, which produces quantities of nectar for, and entices, insects; creeping thistle, which is, again, important for insects; and docks, which are important for insect habitat and for soil biology.

Where I am going here is that, because the SSI is about cross-compliance, we need to look a bit deeper at what these SSIs are built on. I would love to get some assurance on that. Can the Weeds Act 1959 be devolved? Does the Scottish Government have domain over reviewing it, so that plants that we call weeds but which are in fact beneficial could be removed from the legislation? That is the type of thing that farmers are coming up against in trying to get funding. They might want to do something beneficial, but they cannot get funding, because those plants are still designated as weeds.

Thank you very much.

Good morning, and welcome to the 31st meeting in 2024 of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee. Fulton MacGregor, Willie Coffey and Mark Griffin are joining us online. I remind all members and witnesses to ensure that their devices are on silent.

The first item on our agenda is to decide whether to take items 5, 6, 7 and 8 in private. Are members agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

The next item on our agenda is to take evidence on the Ethical Standards Commissioner’s annual report for 2023-24. We are joined by Ian Bruce, who is the Ethical Standards Commissioner. Welcome to the meeting. I begin by inviting you to make a brief opening statement.

Thanks very much. I will bring in Willie Coffey, who joins us online.

That certainly makes sense.

I will bring in Fulton MacGregor, who is also online.