Seòmar agus comataidhean

We have set out the basic standards that we expect people to meet in relation to good agricultural and environmental conditions and extra conditions in relation to the whole-farm plan and starting to build the foundations and baselining for individual businesses. More information will be published in the update to the route map relating to the whole-farm plan that is coming. That will set out what we expect, so that people can access that support.

What you have said about involving people and their needing to know what is in the code of practice is exactly right. That is why we want to consult on it and ensure that what we set out in the code is right.

I go back to the points that we touched on earlier. The code is not prescriptive, because we have to enable the future tiers of our framework. We have set out as our objective that, ultimately, we want to be a world leader in sustainable and regenerative agriculture. We have also set that out in our vision. A host of flexible measures can be part of that, but the co-development in that work will be critical in ensuring that we get it right.

I disagree in the sense that I do not think that there is a particularly light touch in the bill. It mentions the reviews that we would have to undertake of the code and the consultation. However, if the committee has particular views on that, we will, of course, consider them in the stage 1 report. We are happy to take away from this conversation any particular views that the committee has. However, I would not want there to be a misinterpretation of the basis of the approach and what the code of practice would mean.

Again, it is not possible for me to set out at this stage what that might look like. Also, we have undertaken—

Within the overall quantum of what we have in the portfolio funding, I would expect us to fund the CPD.

I am sorry, but can I just clarify that that was the question?

Again, I absolutely appreciate that point. I emphasise that we have tried to communicate as much as possible. I am sometimes concerned that people are not aware of the information that we have already published. More information is coming all the time. As I have said, we are due next month to publish the update to our route map, which will provide more information on the conditions that we set out last year, the whole-farm plan and the suckler beef support scheme, as well as other aspects. More of that clarity and direction is coming, and it will be coming in accordance with the timeline that we have published.

I come back to the point that I made to Rhoda Grant. Monitoring and evaluation will be vital, because we must ensure that we deliver against the outcomes, not least our emissions targets, but also in relation to nature restoration. We will undertake work to identify the best way of doing that.

Of course, it is a complex process, because we are dealing with things that are difficult to measure. For example, someone who undertakes measures on their farm or croft might not see the benefits—say, the biodiversity benefit—for another 10 or so years down the line. In addition, someone who has taken action to achieve a specific outcome might not get the results that they expected as a result of a weather event or some other incident. Ultimately, the issue is how we take all that into consideration. Measuring progress will be quite a complex process, but it will be fundamental to what we do as we go forward.

I do not know whether John Kerr has anything to add.

Andy Crawley, do you want to come in on that one?

In relation to your point about the draft allocation of funding, in particular, just in recent weeks—as you will be aware—we have provided an overall outline of what that budget split might look like, to provide some of that clarity.

What holds us back from allocating budgets and from budget certainty is that we do not have budget certainty going forward. It is not possible for me to set out what the envelopes might be against that when I do not have that information.

It is not possible for me to make a commitment on multi-annual funding when I have absolutely no clarity on our allocation from the United Kingdom Government beyond next year. It would be irresponsible of me to make commitments around that when I do not know what that quantum of funding will be. We have set out what the overall broad spectrum of the envelopes might look like across the tiers, but it is not possible for us to do that in detail.

We set that out more broadly because it covers what we currently fund by direct payments and how that is split across the future tiers of the framework. As we have set out, tiers 1 and 2—the base-level support and the enhanced tier—will be the direct element of that funding. When we introduce the enhanced tier in 2026, we will be able to drive a huge amount of the change that we want, including more measures on reducing emissions and enhancing nature.

We want to give our farmers clarity and certainty about what to expect, which is why we said that we have committed to maintaining direct payments now and into the future and to maintaining that base level of support. We want to continue to support food production, and we want to be able to use the quantum of funding that we have to do more through that enhanced tier.