Seòmar agus comataidhean

Mr Wragg, I do not want to put words in your mouth, but I think that you said that recent things that have happened with the Sewel convention have been in response to the unusual political times that we are living through. I do not disagree that we are living through unusual political times. However, do you have any reaction to, or comment on, the fact that, in this Parliament, one of our concerns is that the changes in respect of the Sewel convention are but some of the changes that are happening around us in what many of us see as being a radically different UK Government view of the powers of the Scottish Parliament?

This is all happening in the context of the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 and the REUL bill, with implications for devolved law on an industrial scale. The context is also that, for the first time since the days of Queen Anne, I think, UK ministers have intercepted a bill before it got to the royal desk. Do you see that as part of a slightly bigger context than concerns about the Sewel convention.

I will go first to Mr Irranca-Davies. The committee has been looking at the impact of the changing understanding of the Sewel convention, if I can put it as diplomatically as that, on our situation in Scotland. It is something on which the Welsh Government has commented. Will you say something about how the situation in Wales has developed, from the Senedd’s point of view, particularly in the light of, I understand, the seven instances in which the UK has legislated without the Senedd’s consent?

Last week, as I am sure you heard, Tommy Smith, the distinguished jazz musician, pointed out that a number of European countries, some of which are similarly sized to Scotland, have a radio channel that plays jazz, one that plays traditional music and one that plays classical music. Those are public service broadcasters. Why are we in Scotland still arguing about a couple of hours here and there?

You have given us a clear picture of some of the challenges that you think that there are sector by sector in achieving our shared aims in emissions reduction. In what you have said so far, you have been concentrating on examples of what is happening and the challenges ahead, so it is perhaps more difficult to tell how far you have to go and what mainstreaming would look like in your sector. What would the mainstreaming of the things that we are trying to achieve with carbon emissions look like in your sector, and how far away is it?

I asked Jim Walker what the distance was to mainstream. I do not know what the distance is to the end of his contribution, but maybe he can address that point before he finishes.

I am sorry to interrupt, but I think that you misunderstood my question—perhaps I did not put it very well. My point is that the animals cannot be just grass fed. In terms of livestock, you cannot have agriculture, as anyone would understand it, without bringing in feed to island and west coast areas. It cannot be done—there would be no livestock.

This is not meant to be a provocative question. Is that because the arable sector has more means than other sectors to invest?

I will continue with that theme. I declare an interest of a kind: like Jenni Minto, I represent an island constituency.

I am not clear what you are recommending to crofters. On the one hand, you are saying that, rather than having livestock, they might be better off having trees. On the other hand, you say—quite rightly—that you would not want trees to be planted on peatland. In places such as the west of Scotland, peatland is pretty much all that there is. What do you recommend that crofters should do instead of having livestock?

My only other observation, which I am keen to get your views on, is that, compared with those in most European countries, supermarkets in Scotland and the rest of the UK have far more power over the market in relation to what people eat, and they are far less likely to stock local goods. You seem to be talking about a dramatic shift, but supermarkets in the UK do not seem to be signed up to that in the way that they are in other countries. How do we tackle that attitude?

It is interesting to hear the arguments develop about what agriculture might look like in the future.

I am thinking about my part of Scotland, and the answers that were given to some of my previous questions tended to suggest that there should be less agriculture and that people should be paid not to do agriculture. There might be a place for that, but I am interested in what you said about diet change. That implies that a massive cultural change is needed at the level of supermarkets. If that is the model for the future and the means by which we avoid the offshoring of carbon—a situation in which we do not produce as much food but we ask people in countries that do not care very much about carbon output to produce more for us—how on earth do we navigate through the cultural change and the change in the attitudes of supermarkets that are required to achieve the change in diet that you are talking about?