Seòmar agus comataidhean

As I say, we will not consult on the secondary legislation in and of itself. The regulations will set out the specified functions in preparation for the plans, and that is what will go out to consultation.

James Hamilton gave the reasons why we have decided to use the negative procedure, and I intimated in my previous response that it is because there will be detailed and lengthy lists of specified functions. They will form part of the consultation and we would be happy to take views on them. I do not know whether that answers your question.

In relation to participation and our willingness to listen, I am explaining the rationale behind how we have arrived at our position, but I really want to read the committee’s conclusions and recommendations on this and, if improvements need to be made, to consider those fully. We will, of course, consider any recommendations that are made.

As I have said, that consultation will form part of the consultation that we will undertake on the national food plans. We will not consult on the regulations in and of themselves, but they will form part of the consultation. Of course, we will listen to any responses that come back from that.

It has a legal definition, so I will pass that point over to James Hamilton for further explanation.

I will follow up on how we could demonstrate that we had complied with the requirement and had regard to the thing in question. It could also be something that is set out in the good food nation plans. For example, if it related to a function such as giving grants, the grant paperwork could express how we had had regard to it. If it was a legislative purpose, that could be specified in the policy note. There are different ways in which we could demonstrate that we had had regard to the good food nation plan.

I cannot give you a definitive timescale, and the bill is not in my portfolio. We have committed to introducing the bill in this parliamentary session, and I believe that the consultation on it is due to take place this year.

Absolutely. I reiterate what I said in response to Beatrice Wishart’s question. Section 3 says that

“the Scottish Ministers must have regard to the international instruments”,

as listed. I believe that what we have set out is adequate, but I acknowledge the evidence that the committee has taken. Again, if the committee has recommendations in that regard, I am happy to consider them.

I feel that it is, in what we have set out in the bill so far. We have talked about some of the regulations that allow us to be agile in that way. Perhaps that goes back to our discussion about targets and the reticence to put those in the bill because they evolve and change over time, which means that legislation can go out of date very quickly and we would have less flexibility. However, I believe that what we have set out in the bill gives us the flexibility to deal with any emerging issues and provides for the appropriate frequency to review and report on the bill. As far as is possible, we can ensure that the bill is up to date and meets the challenges that it needs to address.

First, I want to make it absolutely clear that, as a Government, we have agreed to incorporate the right to food into Scots law. The issue is, in essence, the vehicle that we choose to use to do that. We felt that it was more appropriate, based on the recommendations of the Scottish Human Rights Commission, for such a right to be part of the human rights bill, which will be introduced in the current parliamentary session. We made that decision because the national task force for human rights leadership stated that that would help to reinforce the interrelationships between rights and obligations. Given that the right to food is related to other rights that are of vital importance, it was felt that it would make more sense and be more appropriate for that to form part of human rights legislation and to be incorporated into Scots law in that way.

Section 3 of the Good Food Nation (Scotland) Bill states that we must

“have regard to the international instruments”

that are listed, and the first on the list is

“Article 11 (so far as it concerns adequate food) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights”.

We have said in the bill that we must have regard to that in our legislation. Some of the measures that I have discussed today, such as our local food strategy, food for life and other initiatives not just in my portfolio but across the Government, are all about giving effect to that right. We are already trying to give effect to that right. However, the forthcoming human rights bill is the legislative vehicle through which it will be incorporated into Scots law.

That is why I have re-established the ministerial working group on food. As members will know from the evidence that the committee has taken and the sheer variety of stakeholders involved, food touches on so many different areas; food is a fundamental aspect of many different things and links all of us in a way. The ministerial working group on food will be crucial in ensuring that we have that coherence and that we consider all the relevant issues as we develop our good food nation plan.