I would like to come back to that point. In 2018, the industry predicted problems with the diseases that we are seeing now—they were being talked about at that time, so we did know that the issue was happening. As farmers, we know that, for example, if there is an outbreak of pneumonia in a cattle shed, you do not just keep stocking the cattle shed. Rather, you do one of two things: you either vaccinate the calves against pneumonia or increase the ventilation in the shed. However, with regard to fish mortality, what is happening is that the industry is continuing to restock the same sites where there are problems.

To clarify, recommendation 3 was about the “expansion of existing sites”, so it was about not allowing sites to get bigger—that was the recommendation. I take the cabinet secretary’s point about the industry doing a huge amount of work and all the work that you are doing behind the scenes, but deaths have doubled as a percentage—that is a fact.

I am talking about the figures in 2018 or 2009.

This is where we are boxing over figures that we do not know.

I am delighted to stand up this afternoon and speak about small family farms, which is a subject that is close to my heart. I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests. I own a small family farm.

I must say that, if I had made Ms Grant’s speech this afternoon, I would hang my head in shame. We should be under no illusions. I am a third-generation farmer. I farm 500 acres, which is not very much in the big scheme of things, and I have seen 25 generations of cows come through in my lifetime. There are 160 of them now, and I am extremely proud of them. I also grow 300 acres of barley and my farm is a winter home to 700 ewes. I let some houses that are part of the original farm, and I have three farm workers, whose wage bill is more than £100,000 a year.

My farm is not dissimilar to other family farms of that size. I am proud that such farms provide local employment and create local expenditure. The farmers have a huge amount of local knowledge through local management, and they take a long-term view of the countryside, their assets and the land that they manage.

My farm is like the hundreds of local farms that I visited across the Highlands when I was a rural surveyor. I absolutely assure you that they are like the farms that belong to the hundreds of farmers who have contacted me regarding the tax. I would like to think that I have prepared—I have had reason to prepare—for when I die. Let me be clear that, if I die tomorrow, the tax will hit me and my family, and it will mean that my family farm will no longer exist.

That is the case because figures indicate—I hope that you are paying attention to this, Ms Grant—that a 200-acre farm with a profit of about £27,000 a year and the normal assets that such a farm has would face an inheritance tax liability of about £400,000. I am happy to sit down in your office and explain the figures to you. That means that the family would have to commit 159 per cent of their profits to pay their tax, having sold about 20 per cent of their land. Those are the real figures that are involved. That is what you and your Government south of the border are going to be destroying, Ms Grant.

As has been made clear, there are other people who will suffer as a result of the situation. There is a massive supply chain. I could mention the hundreds of people who our farm deals with, including Harbro, to whom we pay massive bills for food, and Gleaner, which supplies the farm with oil on a daily basis. If farming and small family farms stop, that will go.

Let me be clear: farmers are asset rich—they have land—but, on the whole, they are cash poor, and this tax will cripple them, as it will cripple many crofters across the Highlands. Members should be under no illusion: crofters will be affected as well.

I have tried to work out in my mind what the reason is for introducing the tax, and I struggled to understand it. However, when I listened to the comments of John McTernan, it became clear that the motivation was spiteful, vindictive and unjustifiable.

Ms Grant, I remind you and your colleagues south of the border that, if you have no farmers, you will have no food. There will be no future for the environment if you destroy the family farms.

Will the member give way?

I am delighted to stand up this afternoon and speak about small family farms, which is a subject that is close to my heart. I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests. I own a small family farm.

I must say that, if I had made Ms Grant’s speech this afternoon, I would hang my head in shame. We should be under no illusions. I am a third-generation farmer. I farm 500 acres, which is not very much in the big scheme of things, and I have seen 25 generations of cows come through in my lifetime. There are 160 of them now, and I am extremely proud of them. I also grow 300 acres of barley and my farm is a winter home to 700 ewes. I let some houses that are part of the original farm, and I have three farm workers, whose wage bill is more than £100,000 a year.

My farm is not dissimilar to other family farms of that size. I am proud that such farms provide local employment and create local expenditure. The farmers have a huge amount of local knowledge through local management, and they take a long-term view of the countryside, their assets and the land that they manage.

My farm is like the hundreds of local farms that I visited across the Highlands when I was a rural surveyor. I absolutely assure you that they are like the farms that belong to the hundreds of farmers who have contacted me regarding the tax. I would like to think that I have prepared—I have had reason to prepare—for when I die. Let me be clear that, if I die tomorrow, the tax will hit me and my family, and it will mean that my family farm will no longer exist.

That is the case because figures indicate—I hope that you are paying attention to this, Ms Grant—that a 200-acre farm with a profit of about £27,000 a year and the normal assets that such a farm has would face an inheritance tax liability of about £400,000. I am happy to sit down in your office and explain the figures to you. That means that the family would have to commit 159 per cent of their profits to pay their tax, having sold about 20 per cent of their land. Those are the real figures that are involved. That is what you and your Government south of the border are going to be destroying, Ms Grant.

As has been made clear, there are other people who will suffer as a result of the situation. There is a massive supply chain. I could mention the hundreds of people who our farm deals with, including Harbro, to whom we pay massive bills for food, and Gleaner, which supplies the farm with oil on a daily basis. If farming and small family farms stop, that will go.

Let me be clear: farmers are asset rich—they have land—but, on the whole, they are cash poor, and this tax will cripple them, as it will cripple many crofters across the Highlands. Members should be under no illusion: crofters will be affected as well.

I have tried to work out in my mind what the reason is for introducing the tax, and I struggled to understand it. However, when I listened to the comments of John McTernan, it became clear that the motivation was spiteful, vindictive and unjustifiable.

Ms Grant, I remind you and your colleagues south of the border that, if you have no farmers, you will have no food. There will be no future for the environment if you destroy the family farms.

As no member wishes to make a contribution, I will move straight on and ask whether the committee agrees to motion S6M-15261, in the name of Kate Forbes.

Motion agreed to.

The committee will report on the outcome of the instrument in due course. I invite committee members to delegate authority to me, as convener, to approve the draft report for publication. Are you all happy?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you, First Minister, and thank you to your officials for attending for a somewhat longer—[Interruption.] Did I say First Minister?