Chamber and committees

It is also important to remember that we continue to fund some schemes in Scotland that simply do not exist elsewhere in the UK now or in Europe and that directly help our farmers and crofters. The less favoured area support scheme is an example of that. We have made a commitment to continue that funding, in recognition of how important it is for our farmers and crofters.

That is something that we continue to fund that is not being funded elsewhere. Funding has moved to a completely different model elsewhere in Europe, too. We have to ensure that we are utilising our funding and doing what is best for farmers and crofters in Scotland, and that is exactly the programme that we are developing and delivering.

There have been a number of improvements—for example, to the forestry grant scheme. Of the planting that has been done in the past couple of years, about 50 per cent was native woodland. Of the approximately 15,000 hectares of planting that has been done in the past year, about 50 per cent was native species.

In addition, we will soon see the introduction of the new UK forestry standard, which will apply to all forestry applications after 1 October this year. It contains quite significant changes on species diversity planting on peatland, so we will see a number of improvements through that.

We will be aiming to publish the rural support plan next year. As I hope you can appreciate, and as I just outlined in relation to the amendments that have been made to the legislation, a number of requirements are set out for the engagement that we must undertake for preparation of the rural support plan. We could not take forward that work without having the legislation passed first—without knowing what must be included.

As I said, the intention is to publish the plan next year. As the timelines become clearer, I will, of course, keep the committee up to date.

In relation to the work on tier 2, I am concerned to hear those stakeholders’ views on the rural support plan. The plan was strengthened during the legislative process by the amendments that were lodged on what the plan has to set out. The vehicle for delivering the change will be in secondary legislation, which we will introduce in due course, as I outlined in my response to Rachael Hamilton. We will notify the committee once we are a bit clearer on what the timeframe for that will look like.

We have not yet introduced the tier 2 measures. That work is still very much under development, and we are discussing it. I would not write off any of the tier 2 measures at the moment. Just before the summer, as part of the update to the route map, we announced that we would be using the greening mechanism. For users, essentially, nothing will change in how they interact with our systems over the next three years. We want to be ambitious with the programme, but we realise that there will be a transition period, which is why the route map sets out when the changes will be introduced. Again, that is very much a work in progress.

No problem. As with many other areas of the portfolio, an awful lot of work is going on in relation to the issue. As you highlighted, forestry is critically important not just for our rural economy but for our wider economy. As you outlined, it is worth £1.1 billion to our economy and supports tens of thousands of jobs. However, there is a great deal more potential there. Statistics show that we are one of the biggest importers of timber in the world, and we could provide more of our own timber and use more of our own supply—that would be the aim.

There is no getting around the fact that this has been a difficult year for forestry in terms of the budget—I touched on some of the figures earlier, and I mentioned the cut to the forestry grant scheme this year.

As I noted, in the past year, we have planted 15,000 hectares of new trees, and half of that was native woodland—that is the highest-ever level of planting. With the funding that we have, we will be able to plant about 10,000 hectares over this year and the coming year, which is lower than the previous year’s figure but still represents about 75 per cent of the overall planting that is happening in the UK.

I mentioned work on updates to the UK forestry standard, which will apply to new projects as of next month. That has been an important piece of work.

We have undertaken a review and implemented some changes to the forestry grant scheme over the past year. That touches on some of the points that were raised in the RSE’s report. We are considering ways of delivering more planting alongside rivers, and we want to ensure that farmers and crofters are also able to plant more trees. We have upped the support that is available at the smaller scale to enable more of that to happen.

The integrating trees network has been critical in showcasing examples of how trees can be integrated into farming businesses as well. The focus this year has been on maximising the funding that we have, using it as best we can and getting the trees into the ground.

In relation to the RSE report, Ariane Burgess and I had discussions with the RSE and Scottish Forestry, and amendments to the Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Bill were lodged before the summer. Although there are points in the report that we welcome, there were concerns about some issues that were raised in it, and the dialogue between Scottish Forestry and the RSE is on-going in relation to those matters.

I absolutely appreciate and accept your points. There is no getting away from the fact—I have been quite honest and transparent about this—that there was a big cut to the forestry grant scheme this year, which has undoubtedly had an impact. It is also particularly disappointing that, at a time when we have seen our highest-ever planting levels—15,000 hectares, which is a massive achievement—we have had to reduce the target to 10,000 hectares. That is certainly not where I want to be.

I have had numerous discussions with industry and other organisations on the back of that, because, understandably, there was a lot of concern about it and about the overall confidence of the sector. We do not have a budget for next year, so I cannot say at this stage what will be available. However, I have a positive vision for the future of forestry in Scotland. I would like to see those rates increase and to improve that trajectory, because tree planting was on a clear trajectory. I absolutely accept that the cuts have had an impact, and, unfortunately, we are not able to meet the targets that we had initially set.

I know that we have covered that topic in some of our previous discussions. I will simply outline that every project that is above 20 hectares has to go through an EIA screening process. If the project is found likely to have a significant effect, an EIA is required for that project.

At the moment, not many EIAs have been required. That has been taken as a sign that the system is not working, whereas it is more a sign that the system is working, because of all the modelling and screening that has to be undertaken for woodland projects. Scottish Forestry colleagues work closely with the projects throughout the process of woodland creation, to make sure that all the mitigations are in place and that the projects are in as strong a position as they can be. That means that, by the end of the process, an EIA may not be required, because all those mitigations have been put in place. That is the fundamental reason why we did not agree to those amendments.

We also did not want there to be a chilling effect on tree planting, which we have seen in other areas. Such measures have deterred some smaller planting schemes from coming through.

That is certainly not what I have heard, but I am happy to follow that up. I believe that Forestry and Land Scotland has been undertaking consultation and engagement on its land management plan for that estate, which is very much about involving local communities. That is what we expect landowners to do, and our public organisations should lead by example. Wider involvement is hugely important and I would expect that to take place.

I appreciate that point. I think that that relates to the additional quota that we receive. We had a consultation on that at the start of the year, which contained quite a few options, and we received a number of responses to that. Ultimately, with regard to fishing opportunities, that additional quota makes up 11 per cent of the overall quota that is allocated to industry. I appreciate the frustration about the time that was taken to confirm that. Unfortunately, it was a case of ensuring that we worked through detailed responses to the consultation before allocating the quotas.

We always like to learn from these processes, and we appreciate that that was difficult for the industry. Of course, we like to provide people with that information as soon as possible.

I would be happy to follow that up with my colleague, if that would be helpful for the committee. However, again, I am not directly leading on that area of policy, so I am reluctant to say anything in particular about it at the moment. The areas that are relevant for this portfolio relate largely to national parks and deer management, but I will follow that up with colleagues and I am happy to provide more information.