Chamber and committees

This question is perhaps for Claire Hislop and Jo Teece. In previous meetings, we have considered whether a new body is needed to ensure—I do not want to use the word “enforce”—that what is outlined in the bill and the envisaged plan works. Do we need a new body in this area? Can we develop existing bodies that work around food in Scotland so that they can fulfil that function?

Will you elaborate on what you mean by the world of food being a “cluttered” environment? Will you explain what you were thinking?

Does Jo Teece have a view on that or on the more general point that I made about whether a new body is needed?

Iain Gulland, you have given us some fearful statistics about food waste and you have set out a solution. Rightly, you are advocating for more food to be grown in Scotland that can be used in Scotland. How does that relate to the problem that we were talking about last week, which is the affordability of food? It is not just about the rising cost of living. More generally, we have been talking about how to make food affordable for people on low incomes. We all want to see more food that is grown in Scotland being used in Scotland, as a solution to some of the problems that you have outlined. How do we make that happen and make it more affordable?

My question is for Dr Fletcher and Claire Hislop. You mentioned the important issue of the food environment in Scotland, which I think we would all agree needs to be changed. However, I am sure that you would also agree—although I do not want to put words in your mouth—that we cannot divorce that issue from the issue of incomes. Although I appreciate that some of the levers for determining incomes, whether through wages or benefits, are reserved, perhaps you can say a little about what you think a good food nation should be with regard to incomes.

Good morning, cabinet secretary. You are certainly a regular customer at the committee, and we look forward, I hope, to UK ministers being similarly co-operative in future.

My question is about how the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 relates to other measures. You touched on this in your introductory remarks, but I am interested in the cumulative effect on policy, particularly as it relates to all three devolved Administrations. You mentioned unhappiness in that quarter, and I know that there has been coverage about unhappiness on the part of the Welsh Government about the impact on policy in areas such as education. What contact has there been with, or what have you heard from, the other devolved Administrations about what they feel is the cumulative effect of the 2020 act, plus other measures?

The cabinet secretary has hinted at some of the UK Government’s motivations behind its actions. In a state that operates without a written constitution and on precedent and expediency, where is this all going? Are we moving into a period in which the UK Government looks at the Sewel convention—the convention that the powers of the Scottish Parliament are not altered without its consent—as constitutional history?

As far as I understand it, the UK Government is presenting the shared prosperity fund or the levelling up fund as, in essence, new money. You mentioned the impact on individual portfolios. Can you say a bit more about the impact on Barnett consequentials? There has been a decision to expand the English shared prosperity fund across the UK. What are the implications of that for the block grant?

This is a question for Jonnie Hall. Could you speak a bit more about what you feel a good food nation would look like? You have given an indication already about what it might mean for the agricultural sector and elsewhere, but, at a time when, as you have indicated, we are moving through a period of change in agricultural payments, how does a good food nation plan—which is what is in the bill—relate to the wider issue you are talking about in terms of the change in the regime that farmers have to operate under?

We have talked about whether new bodies are needed to implement what might be in the bill and its plans. Does John Davidson have a view on whether that should be a priority for the money that might be spent on good food? Are there other areas in which the money might be better spent?