Chamber and committees

Mr Brignal, do you have any comment on that for your own track?

Ultimately, we are not talking about Government proposals. We are talking about a petition. Today is your chance to respond to that. I preface my question by pointing that out, because this is not an accusation from me. The petitioners, however, have made an accusation and have raised concerns about drug use with dogs, specifically cocaine. My understanding is that the SAWC has not made that accusation, but the petitioners have. Can you respond to that, please?

The problem is that it implies that there are no people.

But that will not work in an area that is made up of peat.

Thank you, convener.

This question is not meant to sound provocative. I understand the need to tackle the climate emergency. However, I am curious to know whether Mr Boyd-Livingston has ever had a meeting with a common grazings committee in the crofting counties and used the phrase “stock free”. As a representative of such an area, I am struggling to visualise what stock-free agriculture would look like, other than agriculture-free agriculture. Do you recognise the ecosystem resilience that already exists within low-intensity farming that includes stock?

A transition to what?

In an area like that?

I have two other questions. First, do you accept the arguments that are being made by, for example, RSPB Scotland that, in many areas of Scotland, biodiversity—certainly in terms of wildlife—depends on a grazed environment? It is difficult to see how that will happen for certain species if there is no such environment.

My other question, which is related to that, is about what you are advocating should be grown by these people. More to the point, how are you going to encourage behavioural change that does not involve all the people in this country who currently eat meat—whether that be right or wrong—simply getting that meat from Argentina or wherever?

I would not use it, if I were you.