Chamber and committees

Thank you. That was really helpful. It is very much what the Law Society of Scotland said when we discussed the matter a couple of weeks ago.

Lloyd, do you want to come in here? I have been hearing a lot of talk about water quality regulations not being enforced. The fact is that we take water and air quality for granted. Does the legislation put that quality at risk?

Professor Reid, do you want to come in on that? It is unusual to have a bill in front of us with other bits of legislation being used to say that we should not worry about the bill because these other bits of legislation might help. We do not have the detail of those bits of legislation, either. Is that approach unprecedented?

I thank the witnesses for all the written evidence that we have in front of us today. It has been really helpful, and I would just like to explore some of the issues raised in it.

Over the past couple of weeks, we have heard about the lack of clarity, the uncertainty and the complexity around the cliff edge for the legislation and its impact on producers and businesses. Everybody has mentioned the environment, but I wonder whether you can give us some examples in that respect. I know that David MacKenzie has talked about the impact on communities, but I would like to go to Isobel Mercer and the RSPB first for some examples; its submission talks about the habitats directive, air quality and water quality, while others have talked about chemicals. How will the bill impact on those areas and what legislation is potentially at risk?

What will be the intended process for actually retaining law? We have talked about the scale of all this, but what does that actually mean? What is the process for saving a piece of legislation as currently construed by the bill?

That was very helpful.

I will start by thanking all the witnesses for their written evidence, because it is really powerful. I want to open on the regulatory environment and the impact on standards and protections, given that trade has been mentioned as well as the issue of regulatory divergence both from the EU and within the UK. First, I want people to tease out the potential impact on consumer protection and animal health, because just getting that on the record is quite powerful.

Donna Fordyce talked about a cliff edge in relation to sunset clauses. Food Standards Scotland gave us some powerful written evidence about the impact on consumer health and in relation to raw milk and butcher shops, as an example, and what the wholesale sunsetting of food law would do to completely remove consumer protection but also animal health standards. I think that it was also mentioned by Sarah Millar of QMS. There was also a powerful quote from the Food Standards Agency in one of the submissions. It struck me that the comments are coming not only from the regulatory side in relation to protections but also from the trade sector. Ian Muirhead gave a strong warning about the impact on consumer protections.

Could you spell out, to have on the record, what that means in relation to public health and animal health? Do you have any thoughts about how we can prioritise preventing the potential impact of the bill? Julie Hesketh-Laird, would you like to kick off?

Ian Muirhead, you also warned about the impact of the bill on consumer protections. Do you want to say a bit about your concerns around public health, the impact on the industry and on animal health as well? The bill covers feed for animals, too, because it goes right across the spectrum.

That is a very important caveat. Reflecting on the evidence about the sheer scale of the number of pieces of legislation that there are to review, that would let stakeholders and advisers prioritise where they want to take the opportunity, rather than face the panic that people will clearly face very shortly.

I was hoping to bring in Sarah Millar, who talked about possible confusion, given the sheer range of legislative change. I note that you also highlighted food safety, Sarah. Can you comment on that?