Rural Affairs and Environment Committee, 01 Oct 2008

Meeting date: Wednesday, October 1, 2008

Official Report 198KB pdf

---

Pig Industry

We move to agenda item 5. The new members of the committee may be wondering where the item comes from. The issue was raised by an ex-member of the committee, and we took evidence on it. We have received an update from the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment, and a paper has been circulated with some possible options for action on the basis of that correspondence. I am aware that a separate briefing has been circulated to members by NFU Scotland.

Do members want to make any comment or undertake any further work on the issue? I caution the committee that our immediate work programme is quite congested, so any further work is not likely to be fitted easily into an agenda. However, that does not preclude our doing something behind the scenes.

I take on board the comment about our work programme, which is clearly already congested. However, it appears that there has been a breakdown in the discussions between the industry and the Government about how to move forward. We have had the now ubiquitous task force, but the recommendations appear to have been either totally ignored or sent up a side track. There does not seem to be any clear indication of how and on what basis the vast bulk of the £1 million—the £700,000—will be disbursed.

At the very least, we need to probe the matter further with the cabinet secretary and the industry. Given that, from the NFUS briefing and from conversations that I have had, the industry does not seem to have a great deal of confidence that further discussions with the Government are likely to prove fruitful, the committee might be able to apply what pressure it can on the cabinet secretary to resolve this matter and to follow up as many of his task force's recommendations as he can within the allocated budget.

I have a lot of sympathy with those comments. The package that was announced following the task force's report was pretty much greeted with dismay by the industry. Indeed, the NFUS briefing refers to the industry's disappointment at the outcome of the package and points out that it covered none of the task force's proposals. I find it pretty remarkable that after setting up a task force, the cabinet secretary went on not to take up any of its recommendations.

I acknowledge your point about our workload, convener, and part of me is tempted to suggest that we deal with this simply through correspondence. However, given that we already have the minister's comments and the NFUS's views in writing, I am not sure whether any further correspondence would be of use. I believe that there is an issue that we need to pursue, and I would like to bring the cabinet secretary back to talk about it. Perhaps we could tag it on to another evidence session that he might be involved in.

I agree with Liam McArthur and Peter Peacock. The situation has certainly reached an impasse and, notwithstanding our workload, we need to ask the cabinet secretary whether it can be resolved or whether, at any rate, we can find a way forward that reconciles his views and the views of the pig producers. Maybe the positions are irreconcilable, but we certainly need an explanation as to why that should be so.

In the first instance, we could ask the cabinet secretary to explain why none of the task force's recommendations has been taken on board. When we get that response, we might be able to find some way of getting the cabinet secretary to speak to the committee on the issue. However, it might be useful to get his direct response to the question why he has not taken any recommendations on board.

The cabinet secretary is appearing before the committee next week.

I know, but he will be answering questions on the budget. I really do not want to lever in another issue at this stage.

I am inclined to agree with the convener's view that we write to the cabinet secretary first, get his response and then decide whether to call him.

I am getting the feeling that members want to call him, but we should ask him to put into writing his explanation for failing to take on any of the task force's recommendations.

And if we are not happy with his explanation—

In that case, we will have the right to call him before us.

Thank you very much. That ends the public part of our meeting. I was going to thank the public for their attendance, because there were a lot of people in here at one point, but I see that they have all gone.

Meeting suspended until 11:52 and thereafter continued in private until 12:28.