Chamber and committees

I am interested to hear, perhaps from Mr Macdonald first, about the science around the decision. As I have conveyed previously, I am slightly disappointed that we do not have Government scientists here today. I would be interested to know the witnesses’ views about the science in this area, in particular regarding the decision to move away from the initial proposals from the Government and how they have been kept informed.

As I understand it, the closure came into effect on 14 February. Can you explain the extent to which fishermen are still able to fish? Are there any compliance issues in that respect?

I have a question for Simon Macdonald. The Government has moved its position to some extent towards, or at least to take account of, what has been put to it by fishing interests. What do you advocate that the Government should have done that it did not do? How would it have done that in a way that would have protected cod spawning?

Ms Murray, you said that it can be hard to measure the benefits of these interventions in terms of culture and health, although we all know that benefits are there. Does either of you want to say anything about evidence from other countries on that? I realise that work has been done very recently—Ms Murray mentioned England—but, more generally, is there any evidence from elsewhere that might be offered to help to make the business case that you describe about the benefits of prescribing cultural activities or closer working on budgets between cultural and health organisations?

From what you have just described, the evidence is there. However, it has been pointed out by Diana Murray that, sometimes, it is a struggle to assemble evidence that makes a business case. What can be done to marshal the international evidence in a form that will convince health boards, Creative Scotland and everyone else about the need for closer working?

You alluded to the experience of businesses that trade in goods. You talked about how Brexit had not simplified regulation—I think that you were talking about trade—from the point of view of businesses that find that regulation might have been multiplied or at least duplicated. Can you make any observations about the Scottish Government’s intention to attempt to keep pace with regulation in Europe? What might the impact of that be? Are there any areas that it might be fruitful for the Scottish Government to concentrate on to minimise that experience of duplicated regulation or of complication from the point of view of people who trade in goods?

The committee has talked quite a bit about how the bill relates to the proposed human rights bill, and I appreciate that much of what is in the plan that will come out of this bill will touch on issues that will come up in that future legislation. How will the plan be agile enough to deal with emerging situations, one of which, as we have already touched on, is the fact that fuel poverty is bound to create food insecurity as energy prices increase? I use that as an example, but can you talk a bit about the need for plans to be flexible and whether you think this one is agile enough to cope with such emerging situations?

I will not hold you accountable for the forthcoming legislation on human rights, but are you able to say anything on how the right to food and other related rights might be integrated in that bill?

Finally, on the subject of integration, where does Scotland’s global food footprint feature in the Government’s approach to the bill? I appreciate that, as Karen Adam pointed out, the bill cannot be about everything, but I presume that the Government wishes at the very least to do no harm and, I hope, to do some good in integrating how we think about food in Scotland with how we think about our food footprint in the developing world and the work that we are doing there. How does that feature in the Government’s thinking about the bill and the plan?

Thank you for that very helpful legal explanation. I should make it clear that I was not trying to put the Government on the spot, but it is very helpful to have that.

You have talked about holding yourselves to these standards, but how will you assess whether others in the public sector, such as local authorities, are living up to them, too?