The poet Wendell Berry once wrote:

“The soil is the great connector of lives, the source and destination of all. ... Without proper care for it we can have no community, because without proper care for it we can have no life.”

The topic that we are discussing today is about so many things: our land, our communities, our food, our culture, our heritage, our security, our climate—in short, our past, present and future. In the lead-up to this important debate, I spoke to a number of farmers from across Scotland and asked them about their concerns, their hopes and the challenges that they face. I also asked them for their thoughts on future agricultural policy and, throughout my contribution today, I will share their words with the chamber.

The picture that those farmers painted was diverse. They kindly shared with me what they needed to thrive and grow; they also told me what they thought the Scottish Government should do to provide the fertile soil in which their prospects and hopes could be realised. What was clear in every conversation that I had was that with Brexit, the pandemic and, now, rising inflation and energy costs, this period has seen some of the most challenging times that the sector has ever faced.

Of the catalogue of failures that have impacted our rural economy, it was Brexit that came up the most—by far—in my conversations with farmers. Cameron Ewen, who is a farmer in my constituency, told me:

“Can we wind the clock back? It’s the biggest mistake the country’s ever made.”

Without independence, we cannot reverse Brexit. However, I note that the Scottish Government is working with our agricultural sector to help it through the damage that Brexit is doing. Our farmers and crofters are resilient if they are supported, and we are determined to support them in the coming years as we transition from the European Union’s CAP payment system to a support framework that realises the vision for Scotland to be a global leader in sustainable agriculture.

Farmer John Brims told me that he would like to see more attention paid to the future financial sustainability of our agri-food sector, in line with what the European Union set out to do. He is right—Scotland’s farmers are the backbone of our nation, producing the food and drink that ends up on our plates. The resilience of our food chains relies on the stability of our agricultural sector.

We in the chamber could perhaps use any influence that we have to pressure the UK Government to provide that future funding certainty. Among all the chaos that the Tory UK Government has brought to the agricultural sector, it can surely, at the bare minimum, provide that certainty as penance.

Food production, nature and climate concerns, and animal welfare are not conflicting priorities, and all can be done to reach a collective aim. Farmers know that more than most; as custodians of our natural heritage for centuries, they know the land intimately—that much is crystal clear in the conversations that I had this week, which is why I want to see a future agricultural policy that empowers farmers, boosts the Scottish brand and helps ensure food security.

Sorry—not this time.

The new animal health and welfare payment is one example of what the Scottish Government is doing to fulfil our collective vision for agriculture. Through that payment, we will reward farmers who take an active role in improving the health and welfare of the animals that they keep.

Farmer Cameron Ewen told me:

“Most farmers are doing what’s required anyway. I do regular soil analysis. I have a health scheme for livestock. I have no problem at all meeting the requirements. As long as it’s simple and easy to do, as long as it’s not a ‘consultant’s charter’, I and other farmers will have no problem at all in meeting the requirements.”

That appeal for simplicity was common to every conversation that I had this week, and it is vital that we provide farmers with that simplicity, not just to avoid unnecessarily burdening them with further costs and bureaucracy, but to foster good mental health and create an environment that entices the next generation of farmers to take up the mantle.

I am a member of the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee, where we have been taking a great deal of evidence from a wide range of stakeholders on the issues that agriculture faces, and a general consensus exists that mental health is a major issue. There are many depressed farmers, and anxiety and loneliness are widespread. The farmers to whom I spoke cited financial uncertainty as the major cause of poor mental health; very sadly, it has in some cases led to farmers taking their own lives. Our future agricultural policy in Scotland should take heed of that issue, and I ask the Scottish Government to please give it due consideration.

We must also do more to encourage young farmers to enter the sector. According to NFUS, the average age of farm staff is approaching 60 and that average age is rising at an alarming rate worldwide. How do we solve that? Farmer John Brims told me:

“For younger farmers to come in, they have to see it as an industry with a future. Whatever is enacted mustn’t close the door on our food production. We have a moral duty to maintain our productive base and not whittle it away or put it at risk. That base could be needed by other countries in future who will be affected by climate change.”

A desire to provide and to be a good neighbour: that perfectly sums up our farmers. I look forward to scrutiny of the proposed agriculture bill when it is comes to committee, and I hope that we can all work together to ensure that it is enabling and not burdensome so that, ultimately, we can support providers to feed our nation in a sustainable and environmentally sensitive way.

Well, that was a question.

That is great.

Do we have any update on the UK Government minister coming to the committee? Did we get a response on that?

Okay. Thank you.

Good morning, minister. How does the annual report show that the national islands plan and the islands team are influencing decisions that are made by Scottish Government directorates?

Sorry—it was just on the back of Jim Fairlie’s question, because the UK Government minister was mentioned.

Sorry—that was a supplementary question before my question 13.

I have just been told that we have run out of time for me to ask question 13, so I will ask for a written answer instead.

Thank you for that. Perhaps I can ask Dr Webster the next question. In light of what we have heard and your own experience, do you think that the core obligations should be universal or relative to each individual?

What you have said about what the minimum core obligations look like in practice brings me back to what Professor Miller said about physical and mental health potentially being one of the core obligations. In the context of substance misuse, for example, what would such a core obligation look like if it was implemented?