Chamber and committees

It is a crucial area, minister. We all hope that the Scottish economy will improve and do really well because, let us be honest, it has a lot of potential. However, the fundamental point, which just about every member has mentioned so far, is that we are not doing as well as we could be, because our income tax revenues are depressed and not growing strongly enough in relation to the block grant adjustments. That has repeatedly been the central point when the committee has taken evidence from economic specialists and official forecasters.

What I am driving at is the importance of getting the data that we need to inform the policy that the Scottish Government will have to engage with to ensure that revenues increase so that we are much more fiscally sustainable for the future, because Scotland is lagging behind at the moment.

But not as fast as the block grant adjustment.

I do not disagree, minister. The block grant adjustment is essential, but so, too, is a tax structure that benefits Scotland by increasing productivity and growth, and encouraging investment.

The convener mentioned the fact that there is potential for internal migration from other parts of the UK—people coming from other parts of the UK to Scotland, not to retire but to be active in the labour market. What analysis has the Scottish Government done of the reasons for those people coming to Scotland and where they have gone? On what basis has their productivity and addition to the economy been available to those who are looking at tax policy?

That they did not.

Professor Smith argued that, if there is a downturn in the oil and gas industry and if the projected downturn continues on the same basis as when revenues started to decline in 2014, revenues that accrue from employment in other industries will have to take the place of oil and gas revenues.

How well are we likely to do when it comes to the economic growth from other industries—that is, not oil and gas in somewhere such as the north-east—that can replace those revenues? I am interested in those statistics because they will obviously inform us about what is available in future years.

There are numerous reasons why it is a privilege to live in Scotland, but there are three worth mentioning in the context of this debate: the unique splendour of our landscapes, in particular on days like today when it is not raining; the abundance of our natural resources; and our capacity to produce world-class food. Colin Smyth made some interesting points about the potential that we have in that regard.

Good food is a very large part of being able to live well. It should go without saying, therefore, that we must harness everything in our power to ensure that it is accessible to all. Without good food, there is no access to good health, a strong economy or a strong sense of wellbeing.

Members know only too well that, over the years, I have, in general, been pretty hostile towards national plans of any sort, because past experience with plans in this place has not been encouraging. Too many national plans have been overlaid with too much bureaucracy and too many burdens on stakeholder groups, and with artificial targets, and we have ended up in situations in which people are told by the state what to do rather than taking responsibility themselves.

Before I comment on this particular plan, I will concentrate on three themes in the bill that I believe can be the focus for the desired aim: namely, to ensure that Scotland is a world leader when it comes to good food. These three themes are the availability of food, its production and its preparation.

First, the question of availability is not just about the supply of food but about how pricing affects consumer demand and the related elasticities within that demand. All too often, people tell us that good food will always be more expensive, but that is a myth—it is simply not true. Indeed, some of the best and most wholesome food is actually the cheapest.

Take homemade soup, for example, on which I have heard Mr Fairlie speak during the election campaign and in the chamber since. That is made with quality vegetables that we have in our local shops and on our farms. Willie Coffey made a point about the traditional Scottish dish of mince and tatties. That dish can be as good as any when it comes to quality food and it is a lot cheaper than a fish supper or a pizza carry-out. So, too, with a myriad of straightforward recipes.

I absolutely do and I am coming to that point, going back again to some suggestions that Mr Fairlie has made in the past. Mr Allan is quite right, but it is not just about accessing the food but about knowing what to do when it comes to making the soup. That is an important point as well. The education that is involved is crucial. I do not often agree with Mr Fairlie in the chamber, as everybody knows, but he has made a very strong point in the past about young people in schools needing to know what they have to do. That is a very important part of the curriculum for educating our young people, as, indeed, is knowing how to avoid waste.

I am obviously not a farmer in any sense, but I live in the farming communities in Perthshire and I am in awe of what they manage to do, often against the elements and in very difficult circumstances. It is true that they have had their difficulties with Brexit and Covid and have not had their troubles to seek, but they also have some big asks of us.

Top of the list for farmers, quite rightly, is that they want us to buy local. That includes local authorities and other institutions doing their bit when it comes to procurement. As Rachael Hamilton said, the Scottish Conservatives have been calling for that for a very long time. That procurement is vital, not just to harness the best of our local areas but to support jobs and the related rural industries. If the bill is to be effective, facilitating that local procurement is a key component.

Another important issue is the culture that surrounds the preparation of the food. Far too often these days, mealtimes are squeezed, and there are two problems in that. It often means that poorer-quality food is being served—Karen Adam made that very sensible point—and it certainly means that quality family time around the dinner table is reduced. Personally, I think that the French have a lot to teach us in trying to address that issue, because in France food is very much seen as a national treasure. We need to do an awful lot more to imbue exactly the same culture across Scotland.

Therefore, quite a bit of creating a good food nation is about attitudinal changes and we in the chamber know from various other policy initiatives that changing attitudes and behaviour is not easy. However, I do not think that we should sit back and say that we will not try, because the committee has come up with some very interesting suggestions about what the basket of indicators has to be, as opposed to the targets. That is a very important part of the recommendations in the committee’s report.

I will finish by saying that Beatrice Wishart, speaking on behalf of the committee, raised some very interesting points about the procedures that the committee will have to recommend to Parliament to ensure that we go about the legislation in absolutely the right way to deliver what the intention is, rather than getting wound up in some legislation that will not be very effective.

Therefore, for absolute clarity, to the knowledge of the board, there has been no disagreement about any of the bank’s operations or engagement with other stakeholders.

In the past year, has the board been made aware of any disagreements at all, which are unrelated to policy and the direction of the bank?

Thank you very much for that.

When you spoke to the Enterprise and Skills Strategic Board in August 2021, according to the minutes, you said that “part of the role” of the SNIB

“is to solve the lack of private sector investment in certain projects.”

Your responses to Fiona Hyslop’s line of questioning on the same issue were very interesting. Since that meeting, which was six or seven months ago, have your fears been slightly allayed? Is putting the money in becoming more attractive to the private sector?