Chamber and committees

Yes, and I am happy to give the committee a bit of background information on where the commitment came from. We had an independent review of the field services that are delivered by the Animal and Plant Health Agency. That was commissioned by ministers a couple of years ago to ensure that they continue to offer value for money and to see whether any other models could deliver efficiencies or improve effectiveness. The report was published early last year and it contained 10 recommendations including the creation of a stand-alone Scottish animal health and welfare delivery body, which would, it was felt, best meet Scotland’s long-term interests.

We recently asked Professor Milne, who undertook that work, to revisit the report—to look at the manifesto commitment and update his report to take account of the changes that have taken place since then. Obviously, we have had the impact of EU exit, the new animal health regulations and Covid-19. We expect to get the report back in October.

We expect that a new Scottish veterinary service will at least be established within the current session of Parliament, subject to ensuring that we get the parliamentary time to deliver it. It is estimated that the initial work to create it will take about 18 months. There is a lot of information that we have to scope out as part of that process. We will consider what the most effective model will be and how we are going to deliver it. As I said, we hope that we will be able to undertake that work within the current session, securing the parliamentary time to deliver a veterinary service that works and delivers for Scotland.

We have done work through the farmer-led groups, which have provided a suite of recommendations, and we made a manifesto commitment that we would deliver on those. Earlier in the summer—not long after I was appointed to my role—I met the chairs of the farmer-led groups, who were all enthusiastic about getting to work and were keen for the recommendations to be delivered and to play their part in reducing emissions in Scotland.

There will be huge challenges—there is no getting around that—and I do not think that anybody would underplay them. However, we can be world leaders in Scotland when it comes to sustainable agriculture. We want to work alongside industry, farmers and land managers to deliver that. It will, of course, be for the board to test and develop detailed proposals to see what will work most effectively.

As I said in a previous answer, we committed in our manifesto to shifting half of our current funding for farming and crofting to conditional support by 2025. Although I cannot say what the specific measures will look like, because they are still to be co-developed, a key part of that will be ensuring that every farm business reduces its emissions to the lowest possible level and does what it can to restore and protect biodiversity across its business. Supporting biodiversity and reducing emissions will be key components of that.

I am happy to address those points, as I have done a couple of times during portfolio question time and during debate last week. That notion of culling livestock was nonsense last week, so it is nonsense this week. It is not being considered.

On the policies that are being developed, I do not think that it is fair for me to prejudge the work of the implementation oversight board. As I said at the start of my evidence, its first meeting will be on Monday, and that will be for the board to discuss and decide on.

You are right to say that COP26 is not far away. We want the group to be ambitious and, as I said, to get to work and start delivering on emissions reductions. I know that everybody on the board is keen to progress that work. That is why the board is meeting fortnightly. It will keep the impetus and drive going so that we can develop a package of funded measures in time for COP26.

The board was set up to drive forward the recommendations of the farmer-led groups. However, alongside that we have had various reports in the interim, such as the report by Farming for 1.5°. We have to consider the climate change plan update as well as various other reports that have been produced. Again, I cannot just cherry pick off the top of my head and without discussing with the board the things that we can implement straight away. It will be for the board to discuss and consider wider recommendations, and to see what work can be progressed—and progressed quickly.

Thank you. I had a very busy visit to Shetland, and, of course, I met fishers and people from the seafood industry when I was there. It will not be my last visit there; I fully intend to keep that engagement going and to visit again when I can.

I understand that there might be concerns about electronic monitoring, but I think that it is a positive measure. It helps us to build a picture, and, when it comes to monitoring and enforcement, it fills in those data gaps, so I think that it will work to the benefit of fishers. Right now, people can be accused of entering into or undertaking activity in marine protected areas when they have not done so. Electronic monitoring will help to protect the industry from such accusations.

Monitoring also helps us to build data and evidence. As I said, we have outlined our plans to develop a suite of highly protected marine areas, as well as introducing management measures for marine protected areas and protecting priority marine features. The ability to look at where vessel activity is taking place will be vital in that regard, so I see monitoring as a positive step.

I understand the concerns around that and I have received a fair bit of correspondence on the matter from various members. However, in response to freedom of information requests, we have published information that shows that that is not necessarily the case.

In addition, compliance on some of the other issues that we see is the responsibility of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency. I requested a meeting with the MCA, which has been arranged for some time soon—I cannot remember the exact date—to discuss some of those issues and how we can prevent some of the conflicts from taking place.

The measures that we introduce in Scotland are not only for our vessels. We want to ensure that all vessels are part of the programme and that it is implemented in a fair and transparent way.

Yes. I am sure that the committee will be aware that we appointed Professor Russel Griggs to lead on that work. I would be happy to send the committee the terms of reference if you do not have it already.

We are expecting a report by the end of the year. The first few months are about fact finding, and at that stage we expect recommendations from Professor Griggs on which areas we need to look at for reform and other pieces of work. In the next few months, we expect to see the initial outcome from the first phase of the review, before we go on to look at further actions.

We have licences relating to a number of species in Scotland. We have talked about licensing for grouse moors and we have licences in relation to beavers. Some of that work has been set out in the co-operation agreement with the Scottish Green Party. It is about ensuring that our licensing scheme works in the way that we hope it does and that it is effective.

I heard your speech yesterday, in the debate on the programme for government, in which you discussed the renewable energy potential in your constituency and mentioned some of the developments and opportunities there.

It was interesting to go around the islands, because you are absolutely right that no island is the same as another; each has different challenges and opportunities. We are still at the early stages of our carbon neutral islands proposal, so we will of course be engaging with island communities and local authorities to see how we can take that forward. It is interesting to hear what you say about the different developments, such as the one on Tiree. In that regard, I would mention the tidal developments in Orkney. A lot is going on, and there is an opportunity for our islands to lead the way on tackling our carbon emissions and harnessing our ability to reach our net zero target. Again, we are in the initial stages of that work and I will keep the committee up to date on it as it progresses.

On the infrastructure fund, the islands programme has set out £30 million of funding over the course of the next five years. That work is split into three separate programmes for this coming year, on which £9.5 million is being spent. The islands infrastructure fund has £6.2 million to spend this year. Two projects have been allocated funding from that so far, and the rest of that will be distributed across the islands authorities. The islands communities fund, which is a £2 million fund, opened earlier, and we will announce the projects that have made successful applications to that soon. Further, over the course of the summer, I launched the healthy islands fund, which is a fund of £1.3 million.

Those funds recognise that island communities have had specific challenges throughout the course of the pandemic. The healthy islands fund will address an outcome in the national islands plan about improving the health and mental wellbeing of people on our islands. Through the communities fund and the infrastructure fund, we are looking for projects that will hopefully have an impact as we look to make the transition to becoming a green economy and that will create and help to retain jobs in island communities.

A lot of work is currently under way. Again, that will be a five-year programme of spend. Those are the allocations that have been made this year, but more will be coming down the line. We will, I hope, start to see those funds and those projects making positive impacts soon.

I will work closely with colleagues across Cabinet as well as with junior ministerial colleagues. There are a lot of areas of overlap in the marine environment and terrestrial environment policy areas, including on land use and biodiversity, and I already work closely with ministers and other Cabinet colleagues on those overlapping issues.

In previous roles that I have had in Government, I worked between two cabinet secretaries and there was a lot of overlap there. That relationship worked and it makes sense for us all to work together to meet the historic and demanding targets on emissions reductions and climate change that we have. That close working has been going on and will continue.