Seòmar agus comataidhean

I do not have an opening statement, convener. I am happy to move to questions.

Parliamentary scrutiny of the frameworks is important, and we are committed to engaging in that process. However, it is up to each parliamentary committee to determine the time and depth of scrutiny needed for each framework. The process for that was agreed at official level between the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament, and was set out, around the start of last year, I think, by the then Cabinet Secretary for the Constitution, Europe and External Affairs, Mike Russell. He set out a flexible approach that depended on the size and complexity of the proposed area for consideration.

Obviously, the four legislatures will review the same version of the provisional frameworks, which will not be finalised until all the Parliaments have had the chance to fully scrutinise the relevant framework. As I said, in a previous role, I took part in the Health and Sport Committee’s scrutiny of one of the frameworks at the start of last year. That is one of the frameworks that has undergone a formal scrutiny process by the Scottish Parliament. I think that there were others that related to hazardous substances, planning and nutrition labelling, composition and standards.

The four Governments have agreed to a revised timeline that would secure ministerial clearance for the final frameworks ahead of the pre-election period in Northern Ireland, which was anticipated to take place in mid-March this year. UK Government delays in obtaining ministerial clearance to publish the other frameworks leaves a limited window for completing the scrutiny process ahead of that pre-election period. Therefore, as it stands, the earliest opportunity for the publication of the other frameworks for parliamentary scrutiny is the end of the month. As I said, there are another six frameworks that will be relevant to the immediate work of the committee and its portfolio interests.

I do not at all agree with that. Absolutely, there is scope to try to get more women into some industries, and I come back to some of the investment that we are making through the budget. This year, we have increased to £400,000 our investment to develop skills in agriculture and get more women involved in it. That includes a number of different strategies. In fisheries and aquaculture, too, we have commitments, and work is under way to deliver on that.

I hope that I have been able to outline in previous answers some of the work that we are doing to try to address that issue. For example, we are looking at tackling depopulation in our rural areas and on our islands, and I have outlined some of the pilot projects that we are considering to try to deal with some of the issues that we are experiencing.

I do not think that it is necessarily fair to characterise the situation by saying that everybody in Europe is facing the same problems. That is an oft-quoted characterisation in relation to the issue with heavy goods vehicle drivers in particular, with shortages being experienced across the piece, but there is no denying that the situation here has been particularly acute since Brexit.

I am outlining to the committee exactly what I have heard when speaking to businesses about the various impacts that they have seen; that is the information that we have. I am happy to follow up with the committee and provide more specifics, if that would be helpful. I hope that some of the work that we are doing to try to tackle those problems, as I have outlined today, will start to have an impact. However, I come back to the critical and immediate issues that we are facing, on which we need engagement. All that we are asking is for the UK Government to work with us on addressing some of those problems.

I know that there are powers in legislation that we have introduced in Scotland, such as the Agriculture (Retained EU Law and Data) (Scotland) Act 2020, that enable us to maintain alignment with the EU. The 2020 act includes provisions on matters such as marketing standards and covers a wide range of food products. I believe that we have the necessary levers in that act, but I would be happy to look into that and follow up with the committee in more detail.

A number of changes are still due to come into force. The industry will face changes towards the end of this week, with new export health certificates needing to be used, for example. There have been a number of changes, and transitional arrangements have been put in place in relation to border checks and controls on imports, for example. We use our connections with stakeholders and concerned businesses, and we work with our industries as much as possible, to prepare them for any changes that are coming their way, but that can be difficult.

A source of frustration has been that the goal posts have continually been moved in relation to import checks. Our exporters are being put at a specific disadvantage because they have had to be aligned, to implement checks, to satisfy all the requirements for export health certificates and to face all the other barriers, whereas imports into the UK have not faced the same barriers. The deadlines keep shifting and moving backwards, but we work with our industries as much as possible to prepare as best we can for any issues that come our way.

Yes—that is because there had been a significant policy change, which we were made aware of only at the last minute. I understand that the timing of that was not ideal.

Normally, the policy notes that accompany the SI notifications that we send to the committee explain what the instrument is looking to achieve and why Scottish ministers are content to agree that the UK does that on our behalf. Often, it saves our time and resource for the UK to do that on our behalf and with our consent. Off the top of my head, I cannot think of many other incidences where we have taken the decision that we took with the border controls instrument. I do not know whether officials have further information, but, because of the extent of the policy that was changing in that SI, we needed to be able to take the time to fully consider the ramifications, which is why we decided to bring forward our own piece of secondary legislation. Jesus Gallego will have more to add on that.

It gives us the power to introduce regulations that will help to prevent the importing of dogs with mutilations that, at the moment, are illegal right across the UK.

The Scottish Animal Welfare Commission has done work on that, too. The regulations will have a significant impact when they are introduced along with some of the measures that I have mentioned such as the minimum age at which animals can be imported, which were the subject of a recent consultation that closed in October, the results of which we are currently analysing. I hope that they will stop the importation of dogs with such mutilations.

We can already do that in Scotland through secondary legislation. We continue to look at and consider the issue. The Scottish Animal Welfare Commission has been doing work on the keeping of exotic pets, which shows that, as I have said, we already have the power to look at and control that. I should say that, in the legislation at the moment, it is not straightforward that it would be a complete ban on the keeping of primates, and I think that what the UK Government is looking to introduce through this legislation are powers that already exist in Scotland to allow us to give effect to that.

My officials might want to add to that.

Part 3 requires that regulations are subject to the affirmative procedure. If we make those regulations in Scotland, there will be an opportunity for scrutiny by the committee. If we also give consent for the secretary of state to legislate on our behalf, we will go through the usual processes for that. We intend to work with the committee and to keep you informed to ensure that scrutiny can take place.