Official Report 282KB pdf
We now come to item 2 of the agenda. We appointed Lewis Macdonald and Rhoda Grant as reporters, and they attended the meeting of the European Committee at which the paper was discussed. Their report has been circulated to members, and I invite one of our reporters to speak on it.
We attached a copy of our report to the papers for today's committee. It is important to note that most of the European Committee members were as one in their comments on the paper. They felt that it needed more of a strategic outlook, and we have reflected that in our report. They also wanted to see how European funding could be held for further years, perhaps through setting up a fund to help business in future.
Are there any questions on the report? Lewis and Rhoda, were you able to take part in the discussion?
Yes. George Lyon from the Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Committee took part as well—it was an unprecedented cross-committee consideration. There was general agreement on the weaknesses of the paper and on what was required to move it forward for fuller consideration.
We could move on briskly, but I am anxious not to come to a conclusion while John Munro is not present. Would anybody like to make any further comments on the report?
One of the things that was suggested at the committee was that the plan was geographical or sectoral and that there was not enough crossover in the strategic planning. It was thought that the agriculture and fisheries parts should feed into the other parts such as infrastructure and that sectors should not be considered in isolation. It was also suggested that money should be targeted at less-well-off areas in the Highlands. Quite specific things were being asked of the strategic plan.
Given the position that we are in, would it be appropriate for us to accept the report? It is agreed.
Previous
Sheep IndustryNext
Fisheries Sector