Chamber and committees

Yes.

I am sorry, but I missed the first part of your question.

There absolutely is such a commitment; we have made the commitment that that right will be in the human rights bill. In effect, though, all the work that we have talked about today is what gives effect to that right, and section 3 specifically requires us to have regard to it. Let me provide that assurance.

The commitment is in our manifesto, as you rightly said, but we need to take time to undertake a detailed review of the existing bodies and consider international comparators. The discussion about whether there should be an oversight body and the number of bodies that already exist in this space has come through in the evidence, and it has been interesting to consider what has been said. It is important that we take time to get the approach right. There is a commitment, as part of the Bute house agreement, to give the matter further consideration. The work is on-going.

Jim Fairlie raised a very important point about the role of Parliament in ultimately holding the Government to account on the plans that will be produced. That is a very important role.

That comes back to my point about the different outcomes and the monitoring that we want. Local authorities will have exactly the same obligations, but we will, of course, continue to liaise with them as the plans are developed, to ensure that those effective mechanisms are in place.

No problem. First, it has been proposed that the legislation be subject to the negative procedure because we could be talking about quite detailed and lengthy lists that we might want to modify over time. That procedure would be the most effective way of making changes to the list of specified functions.

As for when that detail would come out, the intention is for the draft specified functions to be available as part of the consultations on the national food plans. Of course, people would be able to make their opinions known at that time. Moreover, because these things would be in secondary legislation, if any particular opinions were expressed or particular proposals made on other specified functions that should form part of the list, we would have a mechanism for making those modifications or amendments.

James Hamilton or the other officials might have further information to add on this point.

Yes, if you are speaking about the specific instrument that contains the specified functions. Obviously, there are a number of different instruments in the bill and some take the affirmative procedure and some the negative.

That is why we have done things the way we have. There is no specific consultation on the specified functions planned at the moment. The specified functions will be set out in regulations, which will then form part of the consultation when we go out to consult on the national food plan. Again, the specified functions will be in secondary legislation because we want to take opinions on them and look to modify them, should there be any recommendations for proposed changes throughout the process.

It is not possible for me to say that at the moment. I believe that the consultation on that bill will be carried out this year, so I cannot comment on the detail of it at the moment. However, we have the ministerial working group on food to ensure that we address issues that cut across other portfolios. I hope that that is helpful.

We are open to looking at all those examples, so it has been useful to hear all the evidence that has been given in that regard. It is in everyone’s interest that we get this right, and we can do so only by listening to people. I want to ensure that the process is as open, accessible and inclusive as possible. The point about lived experience is vital in that regard.