Rural Affairs Committee, 18 Jan 2000

Meeting date: Tuesday, January 18, 2000

Official Report 183KB pdf

---

Correspondence

As members will have noticed, a large amount of paper has descended on us, containing several items that we thought should be circulated before Christmas. One or two items on the list appeared after Christmas. We may wish to consider the items at subsequent meetings. The papers have been circulated to allow members to prioritise items so that we can decide what should be put on the committee agenda in the near future.

We have received replies from the minister on the position of the French Prime Minister in regard to beef exports. We have also received: the Executive statement on infectious salmon anaemia, which the committee requested; a European document relating to the common agricultural policy; a paper on the EC approach to forests and development; an Executive consultation paper on the draft Scottish plan for rural development regulations; a consultation paper on agricultural wages in Scotland; and a consultation paper on the proposal for use of article 4 of EU regulation 1259/99, to recycle money into the new rural development regulations. Which of those items do members feel should be high on the priority list?

We might want to consider some of those items, particularly the paper on agricultural wages in Scotland, in the context of the review of changing employment patterns.

I do not disagree with that but, as some items are consultation papers, there will be a cut-off point for making suggestions. That may direct our priorities.

Are there any other comments?

That is sensible. If we are going to consider an item that has a deadline, we should do so well before that deadline.

Do you have any views on the statement that we requested from the Executive on infectious salmon anaemia?

There is not much to add, because we have discussed this matter in Parliament. I am happy to welcome the new flexibility.

Were we satisfied with the minister's reply to our letter inquiring about the comments of the French Prime Minister?

That might be pushing it a bit far, but I do not think that I want to discuss it further at this stage.

In that case, we will prioritise the consultation exercises and bring them into the committee's programme in good time for us to contribute to that process.

Are there any further comments on the items on the list?

We did not really decide what to do with items 3 and 4, which are not consultation papers as such. I do not know whether it is appropriate to consider the European document on forests and development around the time that we consider the strategy for forests in Scotland.

We are expecting to discuss the forestry document at our meeting of 14 March. It is likely to be published towards the end of February.

It might be appropriate to have a substantive item on forestry around that time.

I do not disagree with that in principle, but I think that the document to which Irene McGugan refers relates more to forestry overseas than to European forestry as such. It is an international development paper. It will be interesting, but it will not necessarily form part of our discussion of forestry strategy in Scotland.

If there are no comments, that concludes item 8.