We have put in four options for enhanced screening because they are the options that people will be able to buy into and with which people will come with us on that journey.

From day 1, we have always said that we will try to do this with the industry at a pace that suits it and that will allow it and those who are farming on the ground to come with us. You will be well aware that the NFU has already written to the committee to say that increasing the EFA level to 7 per cent would be going too fast, but others are telling us that we are going too slowly. We are trying to have deep and meaningful conversations about what we are trying to achieve. Everyone knows what we are trying to achieve and what we would like to deliver: our vision is for sustainable, regenerative agriculture that allows farmers to continue to produce food and rural communities to thrive, while, at the same time, enhancing nature, protecting our biodiversity and reducing our emissions. Everyone has that vision in their heads. However, getting there with everyone on board is difficult, because there will always be pushback.

I ask the committee to clear the SSI that we are discussing today on the basis that it proposes increasing the requirement so that EFAs will cover 5 per cent of land for more people in 2026 and moving that to 7 per cent in 2027, so that we bring more people into the scheme. The committee will be aware that some people are saying, “Hold on—that’s too much and too fast,” but for others it is not going fast enough.

It will take time to deliver those changes at a pace that allows the farming community, which we are asking so much of, to keep up. I am not trying to dodge the question; we just need to ensure that the industry comes with us.

It also brings in the derogation for the calving interval for small producers.

There are not just four options.

All that I can tell you is that if they do not feel included, I do not know what conversations they have been having. They are in the room—they are talking to us and giving us their information, and they are giving us their views very strongly.

I will let Paul Neison answer that question.

Given the fact that we are moving to 7 per cent, not 10 or 20 per cent, I would say that, yes, we are listening. Given the fact that we are putting in place a derogation for calves, I would say that we are listening. I cannot give you any more of a demonstration than I have already given you, Mr Eagle.

There are four extra options—in addition to all the other ones. There are farmers who have been doing this since 2015. Some farmers pushed back on doing anything in 2015. Then, when they got their heads around it and started to implement it, it became much easier and the pushback became zero. We are in the same position again, because we are asking farmers to do things that they have not done before. We are asking them to change. We have added the additional four options to take into account some of the issues around islands, for instance. We are listening to what stakeholders are telling us, including about where the issues are. Not everybody is going to get everything they want out of this—that is just the way it goes. I can assure you that plenty of environmental non-governmental organisations would tell us that we have not gone nearly far enough. We are bringing in policies that will allow us to take the industry with us and get us on the journey to deliver the outcomes that we want.

Good morning again, and thank you for inviting me to speak about the Sheep Carcase (Classification and Price Reporting) (Scotland) Regulations 2025. The draft instrument seeks to introduce mandatory sheep carcase classification and price reporting for abattoirs that process above the threshold of 500 sheep per week on a rolling annual average.

The regulations will align sheep with cattle and pigs as well as aligning with EU regulations, including the use of the EUROP grid, which is the system that licensed classifiers use to grade carcases and which underpins payments to farmers. The regulations have been drafted in response to an industry review, and subsequent consultation has shown that producers and processors are supportive of the move to align sheep classification rules with those for beef and pigs.

I want there to be a more transparent, productive and efficient sheep market, and these regulations will ensure that farmers are paid a fair price that is based on the quality of their sheep, with prices reported and made publicly available. The standardisation of classification rules will then help producers to rear lambs that will fit market specifications and consumer demand.

Many plants across the United Kingdom, including those that are likely to meet the threshold figure in Scotland, already carry out sheep classification on a voluntary basis. The regulations will therefore result in little or no cost to business, and the licensing of classifiers by Government inspectors is free of charge.

The dates on which regulations will come into force across the UK are aligned, with the exception of the date for the regulations for Northern Ireland, which will commence one month later. The main point that was highlighted in responses to the consultation was that, to operate sensibly, the system must be implemented simultaneously across the UK.

Classification machines are already operating for cattle, and a further aligned date of February 2027 will provide for the introduction of automated classification methods for sheep. In the year leading up to February 2027, data will be collected from a large sample, to support the formula or algorithms that will be used in setting up any new automated grading equipment before the technology is then authorised for use.

The regulations also mean that any infringements will lead to enforcement procedures. Scottish Government meat and livestock inspectors will carry out unannounced inspections on behalf of the Scottish ministers, record their findings and operate a risk-based approach. Although operators will be supported in relation to classification, reporting and the required presentation specifications, any operator that is found to have committed an offence will ultimately be liable for a fine, as is laid out in the regulations.

I hope that those remarks are helpful in setting out the rationale for the instrument. I am happy to answer any questions that members may have.

I am giving you the clear message that my thinking right now is about how we take the sector with us by delivering policies that it will buy into. As I said to the convener, we are asking people to meet a 5 per cent EFA requirement in 2026, which will go up to 7 per cent in 2027, and we are already getting pushback. You have seen NFU Scotland’s letter to the committee. Despite the fact that NFUS has been in the meeting rooms, in ARIOB and in more discussions than any other stakeholder, we are still getting pushback from it on the increase to 7 per cent. My biggest consideration right now, Mr Eagle, is making sure that we take the industry with us on any new policy that we introduce.