Chamber and committees

There is a lot to unpack in that question. I will ask Laura Hunter to come in on some of the specifics of our work on procurement.

Within the plan, we recognise that public procurement is hugely important in terms of overall spend and the change that we can try to lever in through it—about £220 million is available to public authorities for food procurement in particular. We also recognise that, unfortunately, not all aspects of food procurement necessarily are in areas that are easy to resolve. We have to give consideration to World Trade Organization regulations, which do not allow us to specify that a purchase must be local.

We have to work carefully within the legal parameters that are set out for us. A number of pieces of legislation, including regulations, and statutory guidance have been introduced over the past few years in order to provide that flexibility for procurement so that we can see more local produce within our supply chains and see the benefit for our small and medium-sized enterprises, and it is an area that is often raised with me in the chamber. That is why we think it important to make that flexibility a focus within the plan. For example, there is currently flexibility in designing menus—authorities can focus on food with protected geographical status and different assurance schemes, such as the ones provided by Quality Meat Scotland, and they can specify free-range and organic food—and contracts can be divided into smaller geographical lots.

So much work is under way to ensure that we are helping small and medium-sized businesses. In terms of the overall trajectory, about 60 per cent of around 17,000 supplier contracts go to Scottish SMEs. It is an area where we have seen gradual increases. However, we recognise that more can be done. That is why all that work is under way.

Laura Hunter will be able to provide more specific information about that work.

I think that I am aware of the example that you raise. As far as I am aware—I am sure that Laura Hunter will correct me if I am wrong—guidance and regulation about price and quality being factors in procurement were brought in around 2016. Although that supplier lost out on the contract, it had the contract previously, which shows that it is possible.

Within the mix of domestic legislation and international legislation that we must abide by in this respect, we have tried to ensure that we are providing as much flexibility to encourage local suppliers to bid for those contracts and also to be successful in bidding.

I believe that the flexibility is there to enable that to happen; however, if the committee hears evidence that says otherwise, it is important for us to reflect on that and see whether more can be done. We see local authorities do it—they award those contracts to local suppliers—and we want to see more of that, so we seek to enable it.

Obviously, in that example, the decision is for East Ayrshire Council, so we would not expect to try to change that. That decision is up to the council, and it has taken it. However, as I said in my response to Willie Coffey, ensuring flexibility to help our smaller and local producers access such contracts is important. That is part of the work that Laura Hunter described earlier.

On that example specifically, there will be other opportunities. Scotland Excel is going to the market with its next generation of milk and alternative dairy products framework. The things that we look at include whether contracts can be broken down into smaller lots or geographical areas that will enable some of the local producers to bid for them.

There will be other opportunities. The supplier who unfortunately lost out in that situation supplies the Scottish Government through our overall catering contract. We try to make sure that we are working with businesses so that they feel confident enough in the first place to bid for contracts. The ability is there. I do not know whether Laura Hunter wants to add anything or whether I have covered it.

I envisage the Scottish Food Commission having the role that is clearly set out in the legislation; that is the expectation. It is great to have an independent perspective on what we are doing and at the policies across the piece.

The Food Commission has a broad range of experience. The chair and three members have now been appointed, and they will have a critical role in assessing our policies. Especially during the review periods, if something is not working, the Food Commission will be able to set that out so that we can set out how we intend to change course. I also see the Food Commission as being helpful with the data gaps that we talked about and understanding where we need more research. It will be helpful to be able to have discussions with the Scottish Food Commission and get its assistance in that regard. Scrutiny is very important, but the research element and the provision of further advice on the broad range of areas that the plan covers will also be helpful.

I thank the committee for inviting me to give evidence. I attended the Health , Social Care and Sport Committee last week to talk about the health and social care aspects of the proposed national good food nation plan. It is good to be back in Parliament appearing in front of a committee. This might be my first appearance before this committee, but my appearing here shows the broad spectrum of interest in the good food nation plan and how many different policy areas it touches.

Being a good food nation means different things to different people. We probably all agree that Scotland’s food system has a lot of strengths. For one thing, we are renowned for the incredible produce that comes from both our land and seas, but we must also acknowledge that our food system faces many challenges. A key aim of our work through the proposed good food nation plan that we are discussing today is to shift that dial and create a food system that enables and promotes a healthy population, with all the benefits that stem from that.

The proposed national plan sets out the practical steps that we will take to embed this fresh approach to policy development across national Government. However, it will also be the first in a long line of good food nation plans.

It is a forward-thinking ambition, but we are realistic about the scale of the challenge. We are trying to make a systemic change, which will take time. This is an iterative journey, and the scrutiny and input of the Scottish Parliament, the Scottish Food Commission and civil society more broadly will play an important role in shaping that. The committee will recognise the vital role that local government and our health boards will play in that work. Some are already leading the way in improving their local food systems, whereas others are just at the start of that journey. Ultimately, we are all working towards the same goal: for Scotland to be a nation in which people from every walk of life take pride and pleasure in, and benefit from, the food that they produce, buy, cook, serve and eat each day.

I look forward to continuing to work with the committee, the Parliament, local government and health boards as we progress that work.

Once section 10 is commenced, there is a 12-month timescale. It has not been commenced yet because of the discussions that we have been having with local authorities. It is fair to say that it has taken a lot of time and work for us to get to this stage, that is, to develop our existing proposed plan. Between that and our conversations with local authorities, which Tracy McCollin referred to, we have been trying to understand the level of resource that might be required and when it might be appropriate to trigger that section. It is only fair that we continue to have those discussions, because the last thing that we want is to trigger that part of the act and for people to feel that they do not have enough time to have their plans ready within that timescale. That is why that work is on-going and those conversations are continuing. We want to make sure that people feel that they have the resources and the time to introduce and develop the plans.

We will factor in all the points that you have raised when we are looking at when the appropriate time for the commencement of section 10 might be and in the discussions that we will have with local authorities. It is not in anyone’s interest for section 10 of the act to be commenced when local authorities feel that they do not have the time or resources that they need to produce effective plans—we want to make sure that they are able to do that. That is why the engagement is so important.

I certainly hope so. We have tried to strike the right balance. Of course, this is the first step, and it is a big change to the way that the Government works and how we embed different practices and engage across portfolios in addition to the consideration that will have to be given to the plan. It will also be new for local authorities and health boards.

The approach that we have taken is the right one, and the Scottish Food Commission will have an important role throughout the process, because it will be able to monitor and see how all that is working and whether the plan is delivering against the intended outcomes. Time will tell. However, it is important that local authorities have the ability to determine the outcomes that are important for their areas. The indicators and the measurements that they are using are also important. For us to be able to gather that information at a national level, it is helpful to see how things are being delivered overall. How that might work is part of the engagement and discussion that we will have with local authorities.

Right now, the only figures that we have associated with that are those that we published in the financial memorandum to the Good Food Nation (Scotland) Bill. Having been through the process ourselves, however, we have taken note of the amount of resource and work that was needed to do that, which is why that on-going engagement with local authorities is important. It is really just about trying to bottom out what that resource might look like.

I recognise that that is the view of some stakeholders, but I know that, as you can imagine, other stakeholders would take the opposite view. As has been outlined, the agriculture budget is ring fenced for that purpose, and the vast majority of that budget goes on the direct payments that we make to our farmers and crofters.

We have not bottomed out what the resource request for the development of the plans will look like. We are just starting our discussions for next year’s budget, so I cannot give any further information to the committee on that. However, as I said, the agriculture funding is ring fenced for that purpose.