Seòmar agus comataidhean

Our focus is, quite rightly, on delivering the policies and proposals that have been set out in the plan. I emphasise that the figure of 45 per cent uptake of measures by 2040 was based on robust research commissioned through ClimateXChange and delivered by Scotland’s Rural College. It is challenging, but the research sets out that it is believed to be achievable.

Right across Scotland, many farmers and crofters are already undertaking positive measures in relation to climate and nature, such as the use of sexed semen in dairy animal health measures and the reduction in calving intervals. Some suppliers in the market are also instigating such changes. My focus is very much on delivering what we have set out in the climate change plan, rather than working in the meantime on back-up policies, if you see what I mean. It is also important to remember that we have to monitor and provide annual updates on our progress and our targets. There will be another plan in five years’ time, so we will have to look at it very closely to ensure that we are continuing to deliver on the ambitions that we set out in the draft plan.

That is important, especially when we are looking at agriculture. What will happen in future carbon budget periods, as opposed to what happens in the coming five years, will have the biggest impact on emissions reductions. As I set out in previous responses, it is about us building on the foundations and, ultimately, preparing for the full implementation of the future framework of support.

John, do you want to add anything else about monitoring?

A partnership approach is really important in providing underpinning support for the industry and in incentivising uptake of some of the measures.

In relation to the measures that we have introduced so far, we have attached conditions for people to receive support through the whole farm plan, and those conditions will ramp up in the coming years. We expect everyone to have in place all the relevant plans that we have set out by 2028. We also have conditions to prevent the deterioration of some of our most valuable land and to protect our peatlands. We introduced a good agricultural and environmental condition to prevent any further erosion or damage in that regard.

The fundamental principle of our approach is that we very much want to work with farmers and crofters, because we need to take everybody with us on this journey so that we provide a just transition and help businesses to become more resilient to the climate challenges that we face.

We are focused on the measures that we want to introduce and on the implementation of the four-tier framework. Ultimately, one of the bonuses of the new system compared with the operation of the common agricultural policy is that there will be flexibility between the different tiers. Under the future framework of support, we will be able to change things if we feel that changes are needed. We will work with the industry on that, and we will monitor and evaluate the different measures that we have introduced to see how things are moving.

We have not worked up a particular backstop at the moment, because we want to work with the industry and invest in the tier 4 measures and skills. We are providing upskilling and training opportunities, and we want the sector to feel that it has every opportunity to take part in building the support framework.

No, it is because it is believed that the target is achievable by that time.

That is looking into the future. As we have touched on, there will be monitoring during that time. Also, we will set out other climate change plans in that period and those will provide updates.

The 45 per cent uptake target is very much the focus, and it is believed to be achievable on the basis of the research that has been commissioned.

Mitigation measures were identified and published through ClimateXChange-commissioned research that was carried out by the SRUC. We could consider setting out more information on that in the plan. What has been done in relation to those measures has essentially formed the basis of many of the actions that we have already taken forward so far or that are already published. In 2023, we published a list of measures on the Government’s website that were potentially going to be used as part of tier 2 of the framework. That is where some of the measures emanated from.

Some of the measures are built into the work that we have been developing on the code of practice on sustainable and regenerative agriculture, and we published the first version of that last summer. Measures that have been considered through the ecological focus areas, along with some of the changes that are being implemented this year and next, are being examined as part of that work, too.

There are probably a few points in what you have talked about. First, there is the investment that we make in looking at such technologies. As we touched on in some of our discussions last week on the budget, we are always interested in looking at and investing in innovation. A variety of projects have been funded to do exactly that. That is the purpose of our knowledge transfer and innovation fund. That also funds the monitor farm network, which has been helpful in peer learning exchange, looking at what is happening elsewhere.

There is wider investment in some of the bigger technologies that you spoke about. Another exciting example of that, which relates to a previous point that I made in relation to non-road mobile machinery, is the HydroGlen project that we funded the James Hutton Institute to undertake. That has been on-going for a number of years, and it is about doing exactly that: producing hydrogen in a way that can support and sustain the rural economy and fuel machinery. That project is very much on-going, and, in any learning that we get from it and from some of the projects that you have talked about, it is about how we can scale it up and incentivise use.

I cannot speak to what future budgets will contain. We discussed the budget last week. We have had the spending review, which is not a budget but will provide an overall line of sight. Some areas are proposals rather than policies, because we recognise that a lot of work is on-going. In some areas that we mentioned, things could change rapidly up to the end of the carbon budget period in 2040. We will consider what we can do, including incentivising the uptake of different measures, and will continue to work with the sector as we do that.

It was one of the policy proposals that the Climate Change Committee put forward, but, recognising how important the livestock industry is in Scotland, we were concerned about the impact that such a policy, should it be delivered, would have not only on agriculture but across the broader rural economy and our economy as a whole. That means that we have had to consider how we look more broadly across the piece if we are to meet those carbon budgets. That also involves other sectors, because it is not for agriculture alone to deliver on reaching our net zero ambitions. We need to look more broadly across other areas and think about how we can deliver the targets together.

I feel that we have put forward ambitious policies and proposals that will, as an alternative to reducing numbers, help to reduce the intensity of emissions in the livestock sector—as I mentioned earlier—while ensuring that we have a thriving agricultural industry. We have a landscape that is well suited to producing livestock, and we want to ensure that that continues long into the future.

There are a few points in that. To be fair to John Kerr, what he was saying and what we have been saying is that agriculture is very much part of the solution to the climate and nature issues that we face. That touches on the perceptions that Tim Eagle has just spoken about. It is about our policies giving better recognition to the role that agriculture plays in delivering on the ambitions.

You have set out a criticism of the 2024 act, which would never have contained the detail. We had multiple discussions during the scrutiny process, because the act introduced the powers to deliver a future framework of support, during which time we developed the detail with the industry. Much of the information that has been published about the overall direction in which we are going is available in the list of measures and the route map that we have spoken about, along with the initial version of the code of practice, which we have published. We are set to publish the final version of it once the rural support plan has been published.

Among all of that, we have provided stability through direct payments and have outlined our commitment to support our livestock sector through voluntary coupled support and other measures, because we recognise how important it is to provide certainty. I can only reiterate what I have already said: I appreciate criticisms about the scale and pace of change, because we want to work with the sector and ensure that we are implementing policies that work and will deliver our ambitions for the future. Of course, we can then look to scale those up in the years ahead, as we have set out in the draft climate change plan.