Chamber and committees

It comes back to the point that, if we were to fully increase that budget, where would we take the capital funding from? As we have talked about today, each fund is vital in its own area.

I agree with the comments that you have just read out. The investment that we are making in the Atlantic rainforest—about £4.5 million this year—will help us to do exactly that work. It is about using our resources to manage our invasive species and best protect that resource.

We have done a power of work in relation to forestry. We can look at how the industry has grown—I think that we were still responsible for about 62 per cent of all planting in the UK last year. We want to ensure that we build confidence in the sector and a future for it, but there is no getting around the fact that there is a big cut to the capital budget for forestry. We have £27 million available for new planting this year, so we must utilise that as best we can to ensure that we get trees in the ground.

You are right and I completely understand why they would feel like that, being in that position. Unfortunately, we do go through these annual budget processes. You are also right about how vital their role has been. The project is successful, and I hope that it will continue to be successful. A lot of that success is down to the groundwork that the community development officers have put into making it a success and ensuring that we have true community engagement on the ground as well as buy-in to the process. We will continue to fund the programme. We recognise how important the roles and the jobs of the development officers are, so I will strive to offer them as much security as I can.

Within the budget as it is set out, there is a fall in the resource funding. Part of the reason for that is that there has not been as much requirement for resource funding because of the stage the project is at. All the carbon audits for the islands have now been completed. The community climate change action plans have been published and some projects are in the middle of being delivered.

The key focus of the next stage of the project is about the investment strategies and how we can look to leverage in and make the most of other sources of funding. That will be a critical piece of work.

One good thing about the funding that is available this year is that there is a slight increase in the capital funding, which I hope will be of benefit to the overall project. However, it is one thing that is proving to be successful. We have seen it develop and that is down to the work of the community development officers. I want to make sure that the project continues, because it gives us such a good platform.

We are now considering how we can share the learning, and Erica Clarkson might want to add something about that. It has been a critical part of the project from the start. It is not just for these six islands; it is about how we can share the thinking and the progress with other islands, as well as looking to share it internationally.

I do not have the exact information about the HIE budget. It is not an area that falls within my portfolio. I would be happy to follow up with more information about it.

As I have said about other parts of the budget, and particularly in relation to our islands, HIE does an important job, which is highly valued. HIE is our partner in a number of pieces of work, some of which I have touched on today. However, we cannot look at each of these things in isolation; it has to be about how we work across the piece. It is not down to one agency or one portfolio to deliver for our islands and ensure that we are addressing the challenges there. It takes cross-Government working and approaches to deliver. Again, I am sorry that I do not have the specific details about that with me, but I am more than happy to follow it up.

I absolutely have concerns about it, but I come back to the point that I made at the start of the meeting. I am not happy with the budget settlement that I have. Ideally, I would love to plough more funding into some more of these areas. The fact is that we have the envelope that we have. There are similar challenges across Government, and I know that none of these decisions are easy. Of course, it concerns me.

Some of the cuts to my capital budget also concern me, but, ultimately, we have to try to find a way to work within the envelopes that we have, and that will be no different for HIE. I will work with HIE and with Neil Gray, the Cabinet Secretary for Wellbeing Economy, Fair Work and Energy, to make sure that we are still maximising the positive impact that we can have on rural and island areas.

Thank you, convener, for inviting me to talk about the regulations.

The purpose of the instrument is to amend legislation relating to the marketing and production of wine and wine products. First, it will introduce rules that will regulate how products that are marketed as “ice wine” must be produced, with the rules including a definition of ice wine. Secondly, it will update the lists of approved oenological practices that can be used to produce and conserve wine and wine products that are marketed in Scotland.

The relevant existing legislation happens to be European Union retained law, which, from 1 January, will be known as assimilated law. The ice wine provision in the instrument is required because the United Kingdom is acceding to the comprehensive and progressive agreement for trans-Pacific partnership, and the provision is required for compliance with the terms of the CPTPP. Although ice wine is not produced in the UK, it is imported, and a definition of it is required to ensure that consumers can identify products that are made according to specified criteria that apply to its production.

The provision in question amends regulation EU 2019/33 to provide that products may only be marketed in Scotland as “ice wine” or similar terms if they have been produced

“exclusively from grapes naturally frozen on the vine.”

The same provision is being made across Great Britain.

Also included in the instrument are changes to approved oenological practices. Regulation EU 2019/934 authorises specified oenological practices that can be used to produce and conserve wine. The instrument amends the regulation to update those practices to reflect updates to the International Organisation of Vine and Wine’s—or OIV’s—approved methods, which largely already exist in EU law.

The UK is a member of the OIV, and its recommendations form the basis of domestic, EU and many third countries’ wine production rules. The instrument will ultimately ensure that wine producers and importers have access to the latest technological developments and wine-making practices, in line with EU law. The UK and Welsh Governments are making the same changes for England and Wales.

Before laying the instrument, the Scottish Government carried out a consultation through Citizen Space and directly contacted major stakeholders. The consultation ran from 31 August to 8 October. Although major stakeholders such as Wine GB and the Wine and Spirit Trade Association did not respond, they had previously responded to the UK Government’s consultation on the proposals, and the response to that was generally positive. There were five respondents in total to the Scottish consultation, which came from individual members of the public, and their responses advised that there would be either a positive impact or no impact from the proposed regulatory changes. The instrument was also notified to the World Trade Organization technical barriers to trade committee, but no comments were received.

I hope that my comments have been helpful in outlining what the instrument is for. I am, of course, happy to take any questions that the committee might have.

I will give a bit more detail on that. As I outlined in my opening comments, the instrument is, in essence, split into two parts. The definition of ice wine will not really have an impact on producers here, because it is not made in Scotland. It is quite a niche product that is, I think, largely produced in countries such as Canada and Germany.

From the consultation responses that we have received, it seems that there will be no impact in relation to the definition. Obviously there will be an impact on producers that use artificially frozen grapes, as they will no longer come under that definition, but, again, that will not affect our industry in Great Britain as far as I am aware. Perhaps Kevin Matheson has more to add on that.

The changes that are being proposed to oenological practices have been broadly welcomed, and there has been a positive reaction to them. They have already been implemented in the EU, where they have been seen as benefiting exporters and bottlers and encouraging innovation. Again, I do not know whether Kevin Matheson wants to add to that or whether I have adequately covered it.

Absolutely. You raise a really important point. It is important that we do not conflate or in any way confuse the different roles and responsibilities in relation to this. As I have said, we have the responsibility of laying the SSI in relation to setting the levy ceilings. However, it is up to QMS, if it wants to raise the levy, to have that consultation and discussion with its levy payers and to put forward those proposals to me, ultimately, for approval.

I am sure that the committee will agree that QMS plays a hugely valuable role in marketing and promoting red meat and in everything else that it does for the red meat industry. I have seen at first hand, through the different trade fairs that QMS attends, what it does in relation to exports and the value of its promotion to the red meat sector, which equates to tens of millions of pounds annually.

The strategy that QMS is consulting and engaging with its members on at the moment shows it to be driving forward sustainability for the red meat sector as well as considering a number of exciting projects. However, it is up to QMS to have that discussion with its levy payers to show exactly what it is doing on their behalf and why that role is so critical.

I am sorry, but I do not understand what you mean.

Michelle Colquhoun has the list.

The NFUS and the SAMW.