Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 15 July 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 396 contributions

|

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]

Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 5 March 2025

Tim Eagle

The bill sees the addition of the word “environment” to the things that NatureScot must account for. What was the purpose of that addition and how will you assess that? What does it mean in practice?

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]

Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 5 March 2025

Tim Eagle

Good morning. Thank you for coming in.

My questions are about the 30 by 30 targets for 30 per cent of land and sea to be protected by 2030. I believe that the legislative team thought about making changes to legislation to help to make that doable in the foreseeable future, but there is nothing in the bill on that. What did you think it might have been useful to include in the legislation, and why are those things not in the bill? How do you think that you can make progress on the 30 by 30 targets?

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]

Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 5 March 2025

Tim Eagle

If you are not going to implement legislative changes on the 30 by 30 targets, how will you make progress on them?

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee [Draft]

Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 5 March 2025

Tim Eagle

I will come to the point on “have regard to” in a second, because I love a bit of legal terminology.

First, I go back to Emma Harper’s point about economic opportunities in national parks, which is critical. I want to double check that I have this right. Section 1 of the 2000 act sets out four principal national park aims and, in the bill, you slightly tinker with those aims but not very much. However, section 5(2)(1) of the bill amends the 2000 act by introducing a new section 1(2), which adds six new aims that are around issues such as the natural environment, biodiversity, climate and access. Those aims expand upon the four main national park aims, but none of them refers to the economy or economic development in a national park.

That concerns me slightly, because lots of businesses, not just farmers, operate in the parks. Why not add another aim that is about enhancing and protecting the sustainable economic development of those areas?

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee

“Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the Highlands and Islands”

Meeting date: 26 February 2025

Tim Eagle

I think that my question has just been answered. I was going to ask what response you have had from the Scottish Government and what your big summary message to us is. You have just said that it is not just the Scottish Government but all of us as MSPs, in representing our constituents, who have a responsibility to be pushing and questioning and constantly asking. Unless there is anything else that you want to add, I think that you just summarised the situation.

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee

“Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the Highlands and Islands”

Meeting date: 26 February 2025

Tim Eagle

It is an interesting point that we hide smaller groups because of a bigger subset. Perhaps I made the wrong assumption, but I thought that we would factor that into such research. However, your evidence is that we do not. Your research allowed smaller groups to have a voice, which otherwise they might not have had. It might not even be in Inverness. Elgin or Dingwall, for example, have slightly larger populations that are significantly bigger than west coast villages with a handful of people.

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee

“Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the Highlands and Islands”

Meeting date: 26 February 2025

Tim Eagle

Good morning. It has been a really interesting discussion. I have to admit that I have just been looking up your briefing papers on human rights budgeting to try to get it into my head. I might take you up on the offer to meet you separately to go through some of that, because I am struggling a wee bit to understand how human rights come into the national performance framework and national outcomes and then into delivery within the financial envelope that we have. I hope that, one day, I will get my head around it.

My question is about the Scottish household survey. Interestingly, there was broad satisfaction across Scotland, in rural and urban areas, with services such as schools and health, although the satisfaction rates for public transport in rural areas were suggested to be worse.

How did you factor other surveys, such as the Scottish household survey, into your research? Do you have any comments on the comparison between your work and the household survey?

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 19 February 2025

Tim Eagle

In fairness, I think that Rhoda Grant said at the very beginning of her question that none of us doubts the outcome that we are trying to get—which is incentivising business, helping us to be more sustainable and so on—and that it is just about how it works in practice and making sure that it becomes not a burden to the agriculture industry but, rather, a positive thing. It is important to monitor that all the way through.

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee

Future Agriculture Policy

Meeting date: 19 February 2025

Tim Eagle

That is because it is messy.

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee

Future Agriculture Policy

Meeting date: 19 February 2025

Tim Eagle

Perhaps I have not explained myself well. My point is about the rural support plan, not about the detail. I thought that the idea behind the rural support plan was that it would underpin all the new grant schemes and that it would be a document that showed the Scottish Government’s outcomes so that farmers could apply for support that fits the outcomes that you are looking for. Without that document, it feels as if we cannot do that, because your route map does not give that level of detail.