Official Report 1195KB pdf
The next item of business is consideration of Parliamentary Bureau motion S6M-20070, on approval of a Scottish statutory instrument. I ask Graeme Dey, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, to move the motion.
Motion moved,
That the Parliament agrees that the Rural Support (Improvement) (Miscellaneous Amendment) (Scotland) (No. 2) Regulations 2025 [draft] be approved.—[Graeme Dey]
17:35
Tonight has shown the shocking state that the Government is in and the desperate need for change. Let me tell members a tale of grand ambitions and puffed-up promises—
Members: Oh!
Members can sigh, but I will go on for a few minutes yet.
In actual fact, the Government has delivered a policy so wet that it is turning our farms into bureaucratic bogs. Before us stands a party that once said that it would make Scotland a global leader in sustainable agriculture and that it would support food production, fight climate change and back rural communities. Yes, that is the Scottish National Party—ever the deliverer of words; rarely, if ever, the deliverer of action.
When the Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Act 2024 was passed, the SNP promised a five-year rural support plan—a genuine Scottish framework giving farmers, crofters and food producers real certainty about the future. Fast forward to December 2025, and what do we have? There is no rural support plan and we have a change to the Scottish suckler beef support scheme, as the Government failed to get it right the first time. That is now being amended in the SSI after we told the Government to do that.
We also have new greening rules before us—[Interruption.]
Let us hear Mr Eagle.
We have umpteen pages of regulation just to get a slice of what used to be simple support.
I remind members of my entry in the register of interests, which shows that I am a partner in a farming business and a member of NFU Scotland.
The SNP’s changes to greening support and removal of exemptions will, as an Orkney farmer told me, have one hell of an impact on our island farmers and crofters, putting additional costs and burdens on them. It is absolutely right that the Scottish Conservatives are voting against the SSI tonight, but does Tim Eagle agree that any MSP who represents island communities that are impacted by the changes should vote against the SSI this evening?
I say to Mr Halcro Johnston that anybody who votes for the SSI tonight is, in my opinion, mad, because, given that what the SNP Government said that it would deliver and what it actually has delivered are so far apart, they could not possibly be brought together. It is crazy to vote for that. Suddenly, in this SSI, under the new greening rules, if someone has more than 15 hectares of arable or even temporary grassland, they will have to set aside 5 per cent, which is soon to be 7 per cent. I have no idea why it is 7 per cent—we have just plucked that out of thin air.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. It may have been my hearing, but I thought that I heard a mental health slur from a member who has just chastised other members about respect to others. Presiding Officer, in your judgment, was that language respectful?
As we are having a fairly lively debate this evening, I ask all members to please, at all times, be courteous and respectful in your language and think about how that language may impact others.
I am happy to discuss that outside the chamber, perhaps. I am not quite sure what I did—[Interruption.]
Let us hear the member.
The measures might sound green and virtuous but, as NFU Scotland, which is at the heart of agriculture in Scotland, points out, cramming in more EFAs—ecological focus areas—
“risks undermining mixed and grass-based systems”
as well as hurting small herds and crofts and damaging food production and farm viability, not to mention piling on paperwork and inspection burdens. Greening under tier 2 was once sold as a bold, flexible and farmer-friendly way to deliver climate and biodiversity outcomes with multiple options, but the reality is now very different.
I still have a nagging doubt that the miserable information technology system that we all know so much about is the real reason for the lack of options that are before us today. We now have policy by drip feed from a Government that is on life support, relying on legacy support and limping on while the future policy framework remains undefined, underfunded and unclear. That is not leadership.
The Scottish Conservatives, including me, believe that farming deserves better rural support. It deserves multi-annual funding, real clarity, respect for those who work the land and even really radical stuff such as support for food production. Perhaps the SNP should stop hiding behind green labels and deliver the support it promised, or step aside and let those who value food—Scotland’s rural communities—get on with the real work.
17:40
I point out to Mr Eagle that, if he does not want to be charged as performative, he should not be performative, because that is exactly what his contribution was. He knows the processes that have been gone through. He knows the debates that have happened. He knows that the matter has been voted on. He also knows that this is the right thing to do.
Presiding Officer, thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to make a statement on the regulations. We have committed to providing a replacement Scottish rural development programme scheme, as is set out in the vision for agriculture, the agricultural reform route map and the Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Act 2024.
Greening changes are part of a phased transition to the new support framework and will allow the greening payments to support the commitment to tier 2 support that is set out in that route map. The regulations improve the provisions for ecological focus areas by requiring more businesses to undertake EFA activities as a condition of their greening payment, which will increase the area of land that is managed for EFA and widen the options and choices that are available for those who undertake such activities. The changes have been designed to ensure that they will deliver environmental improvements while supporting sustainable, productive agricultural businesses.
The minister will be aware of the relatively high take-up of agri-environment measures in Orkney. However, the fact that those cannot be counted as part of the EFAs potentially penalises early adopters of environmental measures. Does he accept those concerns, as well as the concerns that have been expressed about the scaling up of those measures in future and the implications that they could have, particularly on smaller farm businesses in island areas?
I will address Mr McArthur’s points as I go through my speaking notes.
We know that agriculture in Scotland is diverse and that it faces significant challenges due to weather, costs and fragile ecosystems. That has been addressed by reviewing the existing EFA measures and making them more suitable for conditions across all Scotland, including Orkney, while adding more policy value, such as by removing the restriction on grazing green cover before 31 December. To ensure that the changes are fit for Scotland, we have listened to the industry and had wide-ranging engagement with stakeholders, and we will continue to listen, as we always have. We will refine and develop our greening measures to ensure that they work for all rural Scotland.
The regulations also improve the operation of the provisions for the Scottish suckler beef support scheme by introducing a derogation from the calving interval requirements for smaller businesses. That is in response to the concerns that were raised by smaller producers and the Scottish Crofting Federation, because we listen and engage with our stakeholders. The regulations will also extend the application submission period to allow submissions to be made up to 14 January, following the end of the relevant calendar year, which will make it easier for applications to be submitted in time.
The regulations mark a significant point in our progress towards our aim of becoming a world leader in sustainable and regenerative agriculture, and they deliver on our previous commitments. We got here by co-developing in detail with our partners, and I fully endorse that approach.
The regulations have been considered by the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee, which agreed by division to recommend to the Parliament that we approve them, and I invite the Parliament to do so. Failure to bring the regulations into force would undermine the remarkable progress that we have made in our efforts to work with our farmers as we continue to provide direct support, such as the Scottish upland sheep support scheme and the calf scheme, and do all the things that we have done in conjunction with our farming community, which knows that it is being represented by the SNP Government far better than any other Government anywhere in the rest of the United Kingdom.
The question on the motion will be put at decision time.
The next item of business is consideration of two Parliamentary Bureau motions. I ask Graeme Dey, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, to move motion S6M-20071, on approval of an SSI, and motion S6M-20072, on committee membership.
Motions moved,
That the Parliament agrees that the Sheep Carcase (Classification and Price Reporting) (Scotland) Regulations 2025 [draft] be approved.
That the Parliament agrees that—
Paul O’Kane be appointed as a member of the Education, Children and Young People Committee; and
Claire Baker be appointed to replace Michael Marra as a member of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee.—[Graeme Dey]
The question on the motions will be put at decision time.
Air ais
Business MotionsAir adhart
Decision Time