Chamber and committees

Thank you. We will now move on to the theme of public funding.

That is interesting. My next question is whether the horse has bolted. Targets have already been set for tree planting and peatland, and we are racing down that road. Some of our routes to reaching net zero by 2045 are already based on trees, which will generally be Sitka spruce. Is it still possible to put the brakes on and do the work that you are talking about to ensure that we get the right outcomes and do not have Sitka spruce planted on agricultural land that would be better put to other use? What methods should we employ? How can we get Government to slow down a bit and look at the long-term implications rather than grab the low-hanging fruit?

Good morning, and welcome to the 14th meeting in session 6 of the Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee. I remind members who are using electronic devices to turn those to silent.

Our first item of business is an evidence session on the role of funding and finance in the climate and nature emergencies, particularly in relation to the rural economy. I am delighted to welcome our first witness, Professor Sir Dieter Helm, professor of economic policy at the University of Oxford. We very much appreciate your finding time in your busy schedule to join us. We have until 10.30 for this session.

I will kick off with the first question. We have previously heard your views on natural capital. Exactly what is meant by the terms “natural capital” and “public goods”, and how can natural assets be properly accounted for and embedded into our economies?

I welcome our second panel of witnesses, who are Ian Dickie, the director of the Economics for the Environment Consultancy; Eilidh Mactaggart, the chief executive of the Scottish National Investment Bank; Jo Pike, the chief executive of the Scottish Wildlife Trust; and Dr Pat Snowdon, the head of economics and woodland carbon code with Scottish Forestry.

Again, we have approximately 90 minutes for this evidence session. I will kick off the questions. To what extent has the overall conventional economic thinking changed in relation to the climate and nature emergencies? How does the concept of natural capital now play a part in your thinking about the way forward? What opportunities does it bring for the rural sector?

That was very useful.

As I cannot see anybody else wanting to come in to address the concept of taxes, fees and levies being used, I will move on.

Is it not really difficult to talk about such things, including regulations, particularly when it comes to agricultural strategy, when the CCC has said that there are big ambitions but there is nothing to demonstrate that we might deliver on them because there is no clear strategy in place for achieving them? We cannot really start talking about fiscal measures if we do not know the direction of travel. Is the issue that we do not actually know what the policies are to deliver on climate change and biodiversity loss, as the CCC quite clearly pointed out at the beginning of this week?

That brings us to the end of the evidence session. I thank our witnesses for their evidence and their considered responses to our questions.

We will suspend the meeting briefly.

Our second agenda item is consideration of a piece of subordinate legislation. This instrument is subject to the negative procedure. I refer members to paper 3 and to pages 21 to 24 in our papers pack.

Does any member wish to raise any issues regarding the instrument?

Okay. I would like to ask how the private storage aid scheme links in with the previous hardship scheme—which ran for, I think, three weeks—and whether the Government has any plans to reintroduce that scheme.

I would also like to raise the issue of potential fraud when funding is provided to store carcases. What checks are in place to ensure that carcases are not processed early and released back into the food chain, with the use of butchering facilities outwith Scotland? We should also find out how much funding is available in total through the scheme.

As there are no more comments, are members content to note the instrument?

Members indicated agreement.