I will not be any more verbose than I have been already, convener, so I will just press amendment 183.

Before I say anything, I remind members of my declaration of interests, about which I will be entirely clear. I have 140 pedigree suckler cows that produce top-quality beef in Scotland. I grow grain that is used for the production of whisky and feed, and I grow vegetables under contract. I employ three people, who are fully involved, one of whom lives on the farm with his family. I generate and pay tax in Scotland and the single farm payment that I receive covers less than 15 per cent of the annual outgoings for the farm. I hope that that is clear and that there is no dubiety about where I come from.

Regarding the previous amendments in this group, one must be really careful when capping things, for the simple reason that capping a payment may prevent large-scale activity taking place. I do not believe that payments should be based on the size of a holding. Payment should be based on the activity taking place in a holding. If that activity is in the public interest, it is good and should be rewarded, and capping it would, therefore, be bad.

My amendments 161 and 162 are about ensuring that the Government talks to people before it considers capping things. Amendment 161 asks that

“persons in receipt of support or relevant assistance”

that could be capped be consulted before that capping takes place. That seems logical, otherwise we will revert to the situation that we had in 2016, when the Pack review came about and Richard Lochhead capped payments. Farmers did not know that that was coming until just before it happened and they had already made commitments. I am therefore keen for people to be consulted in advance.

I am also keen for the Government to pay particular attention to the committees within this Parliament. I am a committee convener, so you would be surprised if I did not say that. I believe that, before it sets about capping, the Government should also ask the committee who should be consulted. That seems logical to me.

Amendment 162 inserts the word “other” after “such” to ensure that any consultation regarding capping is carried out as widely as possible. The Government may try to reject that proposal, but it would just mean that it would have to talk to more people, which is surely what politics is about and must be a good thing.

I look forward to hearing that the cabinet secretary agrees with me and I do not intend to speak to the other amendments in the group.

In my time in agriculture, I have learned that the best thing to do is to sit down and talk to your neighbour and listen to what advice they have to give you on what you are doing on the farm. That can include simple things about getting an easy calving, which could be a question of putting more iodine into the mineral mix to ensure that the calf is born quickly and that the cow cleanses. That is information that you can pick up from your neighbour, from their personal experience. My amendment 196 therefore specifies

“formal and informal CPD activities, including peer-to-peer learning”.

The Government sponsored peer-to-peer learning in the past, with suckler-cow groups and arable groups. Those were sensible ideas, and those groups got farmers together. There was good reason for doing that, apart from just learning. It meant that we all talked and understood our problems, and it addressed the issues of mental health that can occur on farms at difficult times.

Amendment 196 is a very simple amendment, and I am sure that it is the one that the cabinet secretary said she was going to support, because informal learning is important.

I understand the reason that Alasdair Allan has lodged amendment 192, which seeks to extend CPD out just beyond the farming family.

I have a problem with some of Mr Leonard’s comments about apprenticeships. I agree that farmers would love to have apprenticeships, but how the Scottish Agricultural Wages Board is set up specifically excludes apprenticeships, on the basis that apprentices must be paid the same wage as a normal farm worker. However, they cannot do the same job. For example, an apprentice aged 16 cannot drive a large tractor unless they have passed a tractor test, they cannot operate the handler, they cannot drive other machinery and they are precluded from doing other things. There is a real problem there, which I would be delighted to discuss with Mr Leonard, because I, too, want to see more apprenticeships on farms, but the legislation is against it.

I could go on and on, but I am hopeful that the cabinet secretary will be mindful of the importance of peer-to-peer learning, rather than direct top-down learning, as I do not think that it would be helpful for politicians to tell farmers how to do their job better.

I am certainly not winding you up. If I am, I am doing a very bad job of it.

However, I turn to Ben Macpherson to wind up and to press or withdraw amendment 128.

That seems to be a logical place for a short stop. I must ask members to be reseated by 11 o’clock.

Before I suspend the meeting, though, I will just point out that we are a wee bit behind where I thought that we would be at this stage, and it looks like we will have an early start next week, unless things happen to change that position.

I invite Sarah Boyack to speak to amendment 205 and other amendments in the group.

The result of the division is: For 2, Against 5, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 8 disagreed to.

Amendment 9 moved—[Maurice Golden].

I call Graham Simpson to wind up and to confirm whether he wants to withdraw amendment 5.

I point out to people who are watching and to members who are in the room that my intention is to push on with today’s meeting until we get to the end of the group on charges for single-use items.

Amendment 87, in the name of Douglas Lumsden, is grouped with amendment 28. I call Douglas Lumsden to move amendment 87 and speak to the amendments in the group.

There will be a division.

For

Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con)
Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con)

Against

Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP)
Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
Lennon, Monica (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP)
Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green)