Chamber and committees

Thank you.

What are they? That is what I am asking.

Okay. One area has been missed on the rural support plan, but you might want to skip over that, convener.

The NFUS is calling for a funded commitment to accompany the rural support plan. Before I ask my question, is that correct?

In the situation that I referred to, in which the agricultural budget was increased and that money was subsequently taken away, are you saying that the Scottish Government should ring fence that money?

But it has not been used for agriculture.

I have a couple of questions for the witnesses more broadly. When would you like to see a draft rural support plan? Should there be a statutory requirement to consult on it? What role do you see for parliamentary scrutiny of the support plan, including monitoring and reporting on the plan’s effectiveness?

What is the panel’s view on animal welfare and health being missed out of the list of objectives? It is not in the best interests of farmers to practise bad animal welfare, but it is in their best interests to ensure that they make savings, produce the best food, adopt technology and use preventative health measures such as vaccination or, I suppose, gene technology. However, that is not on the face of the bill. Some people say that the approach is too prescriptive, but others say that we need more detail. We should not be afraid of ensuring that, in Scotland, we have some of the best-quality produce. That is really a point for Sarah Millar to comment on, because she talked about CPD.

How do you determine what is and is not affordable? Going back to the things that I was talking about—the cauliflower, the kale, the cabbage, the potatoes, the carrots and so on—I am just trying to work out what, through the lens of the bill, you are suggesting can be achieved, given that, say, a bag of carrots currently costs 19p.

You absolutely are. Are you saying that, through the lens of the bill, you are trying to achieve a change of culture or attitude towards food?