Chamber and committees

Before we move on to our very last questions, I have a question of my own that I just want a yes or no answer to, although I know that that is very difficult. Could the regional land use partnerships, which we know are underfunded, be the bodies to pull together all the data and the groups involved to ensure that we get national data gathering on, for example, soil? A nod of the head would be good.

I see Professor Metzger nodding, so that is one out of three. Thank you.

I call Rachael Hamilton to ask our final set of questions, which is on COP26 outcomes.

I thank the witnesses very much for their fascinating and useful evidence. That concludes today’s meeting.

Perhaps we will just stick with the issue of fisheries. I call Dr Marshall.

Thank you very much. Unfortunately, we have come to the end of the session, but I very much appreciate the fascinating evidence that the witnesses have provided.

I suspend the meeting briefly for a changeover of witnesses.

Indeed—we are really up against the clock now. I call Rachael Hamilton to ask our final set of questions, which is on COP26. I would appreciate it if the witnesses could keep their responses as brief as possible.

We talk about having the right tree in the right place, balanced with the need for timber. Surely that also applies to food: we need the right cow or the right sheep in the right place to fulfil our food security needs. I suppose that it is all down to regional land use and that sort of thing.

Is there another argument, however? We are talking about 25,000 hectares of sitka potentially being planted. It is a short-term product, so it captures carbon for a limited amount of time while it is growing, and it then gets cut down. In this country, it is generally used for short-term timber products, so that carbon goes back up into the atmosphere. Is there an argument that we need to do a lot more work to look into native species that might capture carbon more rapidly and for longer, and which stay in the ground for a lot longer before they are harvested? Is that work being done? Rather than having 25,000 hectares of sitka, perhaps we need 10,000 hectares of sitka and 15,000 hectares of traditional native broadleaf.

That takes us nicely on to our next theme, which is data collection, data gaps and research needs. I ask Jenni Minto to kick off our questions on that.

What consultation did you have with egg packaging and wholesale organisations to look at the pros and cons of the instrument? Were there any adverse impacts of carrying out the inspections at a wholesaler’s premises or wherever, rather than at a border post?

I have a question to close our discussion on this theme. Regional marine planning areas can play a big part, and we see some great examples of that up in Shetland. However, part of that is about getting the stakeholders round the table to ensure that we have sustainable fisheries. Dr Marshall, are inshore fisheries groups well enough resourced to ensure that we get the best outcomes for marine protection, but also sustainable fisheries?

Finally, on that question, I will bring in Professor Pete Smith.