Chamber and committees

Good morning, cabinet secretary. I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests. I claim single farm payment and I have previously been in the agri-environment climate scheme.

Let us go back to a question that the convener was asking a minute ago, about increases in funding from the UK Government, which I would like to clarify. My understanding is that the Scottish Government’s block grant has increased considerably in cash terms and that the rural funding has been Barnettised, so it is now part of the overall block grant. Within that context, is it not difficult for you to make the argument that it is somehow all London’s fault, given that it is within the Scottish Government’s remit to give as much money as it wishes to the rural portfolio from the wider block grant, which has increased in cash terms?

You must have in your head the changes that are coming up. I do not, because I have not seen the rural support plan, but you must have considered what changes are going to come up in the next couple of years and, on that basis, have determined what money you will need in the rural portfolio.

If you have time, I want to get into a little bit more detail on that, because it will be good to understand it. The top-line question is whether you still believe in AECS. Do you still see the scheme as being value for money and something that we should encourage farmers to join?

Absolutely.

Will you explain the large reduction in Forestry and Land Scotland’s capital budget?

Has the money been transferred from Forestry and Land Scotland to Scottish Forestry?

Is the raw money the same or less than what it was? It seems to be down by about £5 million or so from last year.

If I remember rightly, last year, you were bitterly disappointed by the significant cut in funding for forestry, which undermined the sector and caused quite a bit of concern. By my calculations—actually, by the calculations that we have been given—the budget is still something like £18.5 million less than it was in 2023-24, so the overall budget is still significantly down on what you predicted a few years ago.

Cabinet secretary, let me take you back to a letter that you probably will not remember, which you sent to us in December 2024, on the back of the committee’s scrutiny of the marine budget. One of the biggest issues I hear about when I speak to fishermen in the north of Scotland—I have written to you about this before—is the contradiction between the positions of the Government and the fishermen with regard to what is being caught at sea. The Government says that enforcement and monitoring are going well in that regard, whereas fishermen tell me that that is absolutely not the case. They say that it is chaos out there, that ships are being landed—particularly those going directly to the EU—but that we do not know what is on board them. In that letter, you said that the budget would help to develop

“a land-based inspection and analysis system which focuses on vessels that fish our seas but do not land into a Scottish port.”

Do you have any update on how the budget this year will be used to continue the development of the system, or whether that has already been completed?

I think that you have undermined that approach. You did not consult at all with any stakeholders. You knew about it, and obviously the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government was aware of it, but you did not consult with any groups, despite the fact that all those groups were widely consulted on the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill. You dropped it into a budget.

Is this forestry all over again? Is it like when there was that massive cut to forestry a few years ago and the whole sector went, “Blimey! Here we go again.”? That is what is happening with deer management. You have asked the whole sector to do a huge amount of deer management so that we can achieve the objectives of our climate change plan and other things. Then, suddenly, you drop this in and it is going to have an effect.

I have a few examples of correspondence here. A small producer in the Highlands emailed me the other day. They have one deer forest and they sell venison locally, which is everything they want. Jim Fairlie was here a couple of weeks ago, talking about how we should be really proactive about venison sales. That producer says that they are going to be left with £1,000, so they are not sure they will be able to continue. Winston Churchill Venison—an interesting name—says that it rears 1,000 deer a year in Argyll and Bute and sells venison locally but is now going to have to lay off staff. Those are jobs in the rural economy that will be going. James Urquhart, who does deer stalking in remote Sutherland, tries to bring people and tourism into the area, but he is now going to have to pay £3,800.

The change will have a significant impact on rural Scotland, but, more importantly, it will undermine the deer management measures that you hope to see brought in through the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill.

11:15