Seòmar agus comataidhean

In relation to the spring traps and the live capture bird traps that you mentioned, what conclusion was reached that required additional regulation?

Has progress on the plan been derailed in any way? Do you feel that it is progressing in a timely manner and in the way that was expected?

What progress has been made on the 12 action points that are set out in the future fisheries management strategy?

Although we should not be in any doubt about the scale of the challenges in delivering the plan, it is welcome that the services will now be rebuilt in a phased way to ensure that they are safe, sustainable and fit for the future. Given the importance of these developments, will the minister provide assurances that she will keep Parliament updated as the delivery period progresses?

Our salmon industry is a national asset that provides a nutritious source of home-grown protein as well as employment opportunities in rural communities. With Europe reportedly continuing to be the top destination for Scottish salmon, does the cabinet secretary agree that the best way to enhance what our salmon industry has to offer Scotland and the world is to reverse Brexit and remove the bureaucracy and hardships that the Tories have forced on the sector?

I congratulate Keith Brown on bringing the motion to debate this evening. I also echo the calls of my colleague, Stuart McMillan, that this should be the subject of a Government debate. We should be highlighting the issue to the Scottish people.

I draw members’ attention to the silver mace that lies in front of us. Without its presence in the chamber, the Parliament cannot lawfully sit, debate or pass any legislation. Carved into the silver are the words “There shall be a Scottish Parliament”. At the reopening of the Scottish Parliament in 1999, Scotland’s first First Minister called the mace:

“a symbol of the great democratic traditions from which we draw our inspiration and our strength”.

On the founding words of our Parliament, he said:

“Through long years ... those words were first a hope, then a belief, then a promise. Now they are a reality.”

That reality, which we call devolution, has delivered us free tuition, record high health funding, a new social security system delivering 13 benefits including the Scottish child payment, free prescriptions, free bus travel for the over-60s and under-22s, free school meals for all children in primary 1 to primary 5, public ownership of ScotRail, free eye tests, free NHS dental care for under-26s, free period products for all who need them, better gender balance on public boards and world-leading climate targets. Those are just a handful of the achievements of this Parliament.

That brings me to the very purpose of the debate today. Why, after more than two decades of devolution, are we having to debate protecting it? Four minutes is nowhere near enough time for me to catalogue the litany of threats that the UK Government has made to Scottish democracy, but it is important that we remind ourselves precisely why Scotland must be vigilant to the quickening creep of authoritarianism, the on-going dilution of Scotland’s powers and growing disrespect from the UK Government with regard to Scottish democracy.

We do not need to look far to find cause for great concern. Only a few weeks ago in the English council elections, local election observers claimed that more than 1 per cent of voters, half of whom appeared to be from minority ethnic backgrounds, were turned away from polling stations.

I agree with my colleague that it is extremely concerning and I would have hoped that colleagues across all parties would have taken it a lot more seriously by showing up in the chamber today.

Not content with restricting voting rights, the UK Government has also set its sights on other tenets of our democracy, including the right to protest. Protests that are deemed by the UK Government to be too noisy can now be shut down as a result of Tory legislation.

What does all this point to? An overbearing governing party at Westminster seeking to circumvent the foundations of democracy. Deep down, the Tories know that they are losing their grip on power and the only way that they can cling on to even the remotest suspicion of electoral success is to remove the rights of voters and restrict the voices of those who oppose them.

Although those might be shocking revelations south of the border, in Scotland we have sadly come to know all too well the dictatorial tactics of those who simply cannot accept that the Scottish people have roundly rejected their vision of Scotland at every single election for the past seven decades.

In their desperation, the Tories have turned to interfering with our democracy, through culture wars and wedge issues. They are criminalising asylum seekers who are fleeing war through the Illegal Migration Bill; they have blocked legislation that received a supermajority of support in this Parliament and that aimed to make the lives of trans people just a little bit easier; and they have blocked our efforts to tackle climate change with the deposit return scheme.

It is clear that we must not only retain the devolved powers that we already have but accelerate the pace at which we diverge and, ultimately, break away from this Westminster Government—a Government that is as morally corrupt as it is democratically bankrupt. What we need is independence.

The poet Wendell Berry once wrote:

“The soil is the great connector of lives, the source and destination of all. ... Without proper care for it we can have no community, because without proper care for it we can have no life.”

The topic that we are discussing today is about so many things: our land, our communities, our food, our culture, our heritage, our security, our climate—in short, our past, present and future. In the lead-up to this important debate, I spoke to a number of farmers from across Scotland and asked them about their concerns, their hopes and the challenges that they face. I also asked them for their thoughts on future agricultural policy and, throughout my contribution today, I will share their words with the chamber.

The picture that those farmers painted was diverse. They kindly shared with me what they needed to thrive and grow; they also told me what they thought the Scottish Government should do to provide the fertile soil in which their prospects and hopes could be realised. What was clear in every conversation that I had was that with Brexit, the pandemic and, now, rising inflation and energy costs, this period has seen some of the most challenging times that the sector has ever faced.

Of the catalogue of failures that have impacted our rural economy, it was Brexit that came up the most—by far—in my conversations with farmers. Cameron Ewen, who is a farmer in my constituency, told me:

“Can we wind the clock back? It’s the biggest mistake the country’s ever made.”

Without independence, we cannot reverse Brexit. However, I note that the Scottish Government is working with our agricultural sector to help it through the damage that Brexit is doing. Our farmers and crofters are resilient if they are supported, and we are determined to support them in the coming years as we transition from the European Union’s CAP payment system to a support framework that realises the vision for Scotland to be a global leader in sustainable agriculture.

Farmer John Brims told me that he would like to see more attention paid to the future financial sustainability of our agri-food sector, in line with what the European Union set out to do. He is right—Scotland’s farmers are the backbone of our nation, producing the food and drink that ends up on our plates. The resilience of our food chains relies on the stability of our agricultural sector.

We in the chamber could perhaps use any influence that we have to pressure the UK Government to provide that future funding certainty. Among all the chaos that the Tory UK Government has brought to the agricultural sector, it can surely, at the bare minimum, provide that certainty as penance.

Food production, nature and climate concerns, and animal welfare are not conflicting priorities, and all can be done to reach a collective aim. Farmers know that more than most; as custodians of our natural heritage for centuries, they know the land intimately—that much is crystal clear in the conversations that I had this week, which is why I want to see a future agricultural policy that empowers farmers, boosts the Scottish brand and helps ensure food security.

Sorry—not this time.

The new animal health and welfare payment is one example of what the Scottish Government is doing to fulfil our collective vision for agriculture. Through that payment, we will reward farmers who take an active role in improving the health and welfare of the animals that they keep.

Farmer Cameron Ewen told me:

“Most farmers are doing what’s required anyway. I do regular soil analysis. I have a health scheme for livestock. I have no problem at all meeting the requirements. As long as it’s simple and easy to do, as long as it’s not a ‘consultant’s charter’, I and other farmers will have no problem at all in meeting the requirements.”

That appeal for simplicity was common to every conversation that I had this week, and it is vital that we provide farmers with that simplicity, not just to avoid unnecessarily burdening them with further costs and bureaucracy, but to foster good mental health and create an environment that entices the next generation of farmers to take up the mantle.

I am a member of the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee, where we have been taking a great deal of evidence from a wide range of stakeholders on the issues that agriculture faces, and a general consensus exists that mental health is a major issue. There are many depressed farmers, and anxiety and loneliness are widespread. The farmers to whom I spoke cited financial uncertainty as the major cause of poor mental health; very sadly, it has in some cases led to farmers taking their own lives. Our future agricultural policy in Scotland should take heed of that issue, and I ask the Scottish Government to please give it due consideration.

We must also do more to encourage young farmers to enter the sector. According to NFUS, the average age of farm staff is approaching 60 and that average age is rising at an alarming rate worldwide. How do we solve that? Farmer John Brims told me:

“For younger farmers to come in, they have to see it as an industry with a future. Whatever is enacted mustn’t close the door on our food production. We have a moral duty to maintain our productive base and not whittle it away or put it at risk. That base could be needed by other countries in future who will be affected by climate change.”

A desire to provide and to be a good neighbour: that perfectly sums up our farmers. I look forward to scrutiny of the proposed agriculture bill when it is comes to committee, and I hope that we can all work together to ensure that it is enabling and not burdensome so that, ultimately, we can support providers to feed our nation in a sustainable and environmentally sensitive way.

Do we have any update on the UK Government minister coming to the committee? Did we get a response on that?