Seòmar agus comataidhean

First and foremost, the two committees received a lot of written evidence in response to the call for evidence. Thinking back to my opening comments, that reflects the broad range of interest in the work that we are doing.

In relation to some of the concerns about the indicators and targets, which came through in other pieces of written evidence and in what the committee heard directly, the indicators that we have brought forward for the outcomes will help to provide the initial baseline from which we can look to progress. Although I understand and appreciate the concern about the lack of new targets or indicators, that is not to say that we will not develop that work. We have been open and transparent in the plan about the areas where we need to collect more data to be able to look at indicators in the future or to develop new targets.

We have also asked bodies such as the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission to help us with some of that work and to consider what that could look like—which could include indicators or targets in relation to animal health and welfare—because we recognise that we do not have all the information that we need. When we look to develop new information or new targets, the data collection can be quite a big undertaking in itself. The plan is a really important first step, which will help us to develop the baseline from which we can look to continue to improve. We needed to be able to collect all that information, but we recognise that there is more work to do, and the plan is just the first step.

Yes. I am happy to keep the committee updated on when we are looking to trigger section 10. We do not want to put local authorities under particular pressure now, when we are still trying to bottom out what resources might be needed for section 10, given the work that it has taken us to get to this stage.

That is what we are working on right now. We are considering what those resources will look like.

Even more broadly, though, the delivery of the plan ultimately falls to many different areas. As I said, I was at the Health and Social Care Committee last week, at which we discussed the work that is being delivered through the population health framework. My portfolio, in and of itself, cannot necessarily fund all that work. Some of it falls within the budgets of other portfolio areas.

We are discussing what that initial resource looks like and what is needed to get the plans off the ground and that initial bit of work developed.

I appreciate that, from the outside, the plan can appear to be very cluttered. Of course, a lot of things are going on in all the portfolio areas across Government, but some of the areas that you have mentioned have their own requirements. For me, it is about how all those areas deliver our overall good food nation outcomes.

I referenced the population health framework, and there has been close co-operation between the good food nation team and those who are working on population health. A diet and healthy weight implementation plan will be developed on the back of that, which will help to deliver the good food nation outcomes that we have set out. The indicators will help us to get the baseline information to monitor how all of that is being done.

We also cannot forget that one of the most important things in the 2022 act is the specified functions, the descriptions and the fact that, as we are developing new policies, strategies and plans, we must have regard to the good food nation plan.

We are trying to embed a different way of working across Government and with local government and health boards. I do not see it as just another thing that people do and tick off—we are giving effect to this plan. It is, I hope, the first in a long line of plans.

You made reference to the food-growing strategies, which are another legislative requirement. A strategy could form part of a local authority’s good food nation plan, but there are very different legislative requirements for it compared to what we will be asking of local authorities for the good food nation plans.

You are absolutely right. We already have policies in place in that regard through national planning framework 4. In considering hot food takeaways in particular, there is a specific policy that quite clearly says that development should not be supported where there could be a risk of it impacting on overall health and wellbeing, particularly in disadvantaged areas.

That overarching policy principle is there, but ultimately, those decisions are for local authorities and their planning and licensing committees. We would expect them to consider the wider overarching policies such as the one in NPF4 that I mentioned.

The sustainable procurement duty, which was introduced in 2016, outlines clearly that public bodies have to think about how they are improving social, environmental and economic wellbeing in general, in all the areas that they can focus on as part of that, so that all those different important measures are given due consideration.

We certainly hope that, through the different requirements for local development plans and what they have to consider, that will all feed into local authorities and the work that they will be looking to do for their good food nation plans. They could certainly consider that as part of it.

Yes. As I said in response to some of the earlier questions, we recognise where there are data gaps. The next version of the plan will certainly have a lot more information in that regard, because we will have been able to get the baseline information from the indicators that we have against the outcomes that are set out in the plan at the moment. We will also use the time between now and then to fill some of the gaps with the information that we do not have at the moment and to look to collect the relevant information. The work of the Scottish Food Commission will be really important in helping us with recommendations for areas where we need that research to be undertaken.

It is also important to highlight the review periods. Although the plan will be revised only on a five-yearly basis, it will be reviewed every two years. If our policies are not delivering against the outcomes, the Scottish Food Commission has to outline the changes that we need to make to the policies to ensure that we deliver on what we have set out.

I would hope that we will be able to make that clear and help to establish those relationships through the conversations that we are having. That has been key to the work that the Scottish Food Commission has been doing since the commissioners have come into post. We still have to recruit a chief executive for the commission, along with a wider team to support that work, but the establishment of those relationships has been a key focus for the commission. Tracy McCollin might have more to say on that.

I will hand over in a moment to Tracy McCollin, who can explain a bit more, because she has been leading on our engagement with other authorities. The thing is that some people are quite far advanced in looking at food and the different strategies that they have in place. The balance that we have tried to strike in what is contained in the Good Food Nation (Scotland) Act 2022 is to ensure that, although we have guideline principles for what we think local authorities and health boards should include in their plans, it is important that they have flexibility and that each area across Scotland can develop the outcomes and indicators that are most relevant to it. We have published guidance in relation to that, and there has been engagement with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and with health boards to discuss it.

Of course, the initial focus has been on producing our own national good food nation plan, which has involved a lot of work to get us to this point. We have had to look to a lot of the feedback in response to our consultation towards the start of last year. It is stated in the act that local authorities and health boards will have to have regard to the national good food nation plan, and we hope that the further guidance will help. I hand over to Tracy, who, as I said, has been engaging.