Chamber and committees

Nairn.

Thank you for joining us. You were very much in the spotlight, being on your own. We appreciate your taking the time to answer our questions.

We will suspend the meeting until 11:15, when we will be joined by our final panel of witnesses.

I called you David Niven. David Niven is not appearing in front of the committee today. We have a far better replacement in David Nairn. [Laughter.]

Mercedes Villalba has a supplementary question.

I do not think that she can hear us. I will bring in Phil Taylor to respond to that question.

I welcome our second panel, although it is a bit of an exaggeration to describe our witness as a “panel”. We are delighted to have with us Professor Michael Heath from the University of Strathclyde. Unfortunately, we have been unable to get any other academics to appear this morning, due to time constraints.

We have approximately 25 to 30 minutes to ask Professor Heath some questions, and I will kick off. What does current scientific evidence tell us about the main factors that are impacting on cod spawning in the Clyde and wider marine ecosystem health?

Thank you.

Professor Mary Brennan suggested that the bill’s credibility would be damaged if it did not explicitly include the right to food and that,

“as Robin Gourlay requested, the commitment to, and effects of, delivering the right to food”

should be

“explicit in the Good Food Nation (Scotland) Bill.”—[Official Report, Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee, 19 January 2022; c 23-4.]

Will that be the case? Will there be enough in the bill to deliver the right to food, as suggested by Mary Brennan, Robin Gourlay and other witnesses, without waiting for the human rights bill?

All of that sounds very positive, cabinet secretary. You are listening and you want the process to be open and transparent. How do you respond to concern that the consultation requirements give greater weight to the views of the Scottish Government than they do to the views of stakeholders and the general public? For example, relevant authorities are to be consulted after, not before, the Government drafts the good food nation plan and after, not before, the review of the plan after five years. Why was that decision taken?

We will move to questions. We have around 90 minutes, and I will kick off. In a nutshell, what do you consider a good food nation to be?