Seòmar agus comataidhean

That is no problem. I understand that I still have to formally reply to the committee. It was to ensure that we had continuity through the appointments process and because we were looking to appoint new commissioners to the role.

There is a lot in that question so, if I forget a point, please come back to me and remind me.

On the NatureScot pilot, it is necessary that we have private investment in carbon sequestration. We cannot reach our climate targets or do what we need to do to address the biodiversity crisis that we are in without private investment. We recognised that point in our national strategy for economic transformation, and the importance of private finance has also been recognised globally through the global biodiversity framework that was agreed at the 15th conference of the parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity—COP15.

Given the sheer scale of what is required, we cannot achieve the investment that is needed through the public purse alone with the public money and resources that we have available. However, if we recognise the need for private investment, it is critical that what we set out and want to achieve is values led and based on specific principles that are important to us in Scotland. There is also community involvement. We need to ensure that that is all in place.

The NatureScot pilot offers a valuable opportunity to consider those points and to ensure that we have a values-led, integrity-based system of private investment. I do not see that work impacting land values, because the pilot involves working with existing landowners to see how they can make it work. The pilot is happening in two parts of Scotland. It is a pilot, so we will monitor it closely—that is really important—and ensure that we learn from it as we go.

As I said in my previous response, we can see how we can make impactful interventions through the additionality that we introduced through the woodland carbon code, and it is interesting to see that work follow through in the market insights report.

Such investment is important on the whole, but we need to ensure that we manage it correctly and in a fair and transparent way that involves communities. That can be an issue, so we need to ensure that our communities feel part of the process and that they see the benefits from private investment.

On the point about whether that work contradicts other areas of policy—I think that that was the point that you raised—I do not see our policies as contradictory; if anything, I see them as complementary. We have the interim principles for responsible investment in land and our land rights and responsibilities statement, and all that sets out that we need diverse ownership and more community ownership. Our values are very much aligned in that regard. I do not see any contradiction in our policies in relation to what we have set out.

Through that period of change, it is important to have continuity rather than wholesale change in the commission. George Burgess, do you want to come in?

If you are saying that people are getting in touch and they are not getting any response, I want to follow that up, because that should not be happening.

I have undertaken to meet some industry representatives, as I think I mentioned in my committee appearance last week, and I know that the Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Just Transition is doing the same, because we want to do that active engagement and go out and listen to people. I am not going to prejudge the outcome or the next steps of the consultation, because we are still working through the responses.

I appreciate the point about displacement and the issues that could arise from that, and that will all be factored in to any decision making as we go forward. We recognise the importance of the fishing industry to our coastal and island communities and to Scotland’s wider economy. That is why we support the industry.

Our negotiations have secured £486 million for our fishers. Annabel Turpie mentioned some of the figures for what we spend on science and how we are trying to encourage new entrants. We also spend £22 million on compliance. We continue to invest in the industry because we see a role for it now and we also want it to be sustainable for the future. Our blue economy vision also recognises food security and food production because they are critical for the future.

I have said that we will publish the bill this year. I hope that you appreciate that, under the ministerial code, it is not possible for me to give a definitive date until it has all been agreed by Cabinet and discussed with the Parliament. I cannot give a definitive date for the introduction of the bill, but we intend to do that as soon as we can.

That conditionality will not be in the bill. As I outlined in my response to Alasdair Allan, that is where we need the transitional provision, using the powers within the current act, to allow for conditionality and continuity so that we can deliver what we set out in the route map.

There will be an opportunity for scrutiny as the bill goes through. We need a piece of framework legislation, which is what we will introduce, to give us an adaptive framework for the future. That is what we set out in our proposals, and we will introduce that as part of the bill.

We have been working through our consultation responses so I cannot say definitively what will be in the bill at the moment, but the aim is for the secondary legislation to contain that detail.

I understand the calls for clarity, more detail and more information. We set out in the route map when that information will become available. There will, of course, be the opportunity for parliamentary scrutiny as part of the process.

That is what we have set out in our vision. I hope that, during the debates that we have had in the Parliament in the past few weeks, we have emphasised the importance of producing our own food. Our vision for agriculture sets out that we want to produce more and meet our food needs more sustainably.

Yes.

That is an important point. The need for recognition was raised a number of times in the debate last week. I certainly hear that when I am out and about visiting different farmers and hearing about the actions that they have already undertaken. We know that we have a lot of work to do. Initially, we want to incentivise those people who have not undertaken the actions to do so and to get the baseline information. That we recognise and reward the work that has already been done is fundamental to our thinking and planning going forward.