Chamber and committees

Mr Sweeney, if your question is very brief, I will let you ask it.

Good morning and welcome to the 33rd meeting in 2024 of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee. I have received no apologies.

We continue our scrutiny of the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill at stage 1. By virtue of rule 12.2.3(a) of the Scottish Parliament’s standing orders, Liam McArthur MSP, the member in charge of the bill, may attend the meeting if he wishes.

The first item on our agenda is to agree to take agenda item 4 in private. Do members agree to do so?

Members indicated agreement.

We will move on to other parts of the bill and other members have questions, so please stick to the question that Carol Mochan asked.

Thank you.

Please cover your points—briefly, as we still have a lot to get through.

Thank you very much to the witnesses for their attendance and their evidence today.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am offended by the language that Finlay Carson just used and I ask him to withdraw his comment about the “economics of the madhouse”. The language is stigmatising and should not be used in the chamber.

Some colleagues might find it unusual for the MSP for Rutherglen to be speaking in a debate on rural and farming issues. However, although my constituency is mostly urban and suburban, and despite its proximity to a major city, it contains some rural areas, including working farms. My constituency is based in South Lanarkshire, and, of course, the pastures covering much of Lanarkshire help to produce some of the country’s best beef, venison, lamb, dairy and cured meats.

The area remains a major force in Scotland’s food and drink industry. Many small businesses in my constituency, including butchers, farm shops, cafes and hospitality venues, pride themselves on sourcing quality local produce and, as a result, are much valued in our communities. For example, Greenhall farm shop and cafe in Blantyre is a popular venue that opened the first Scottish Wagyu beef shop back in 2016 and offers home-reared beef, eggs and other products directly from the farm.

The food production chain is complex and intersects with many other industries, such as the hospitality industry. Many people in my constituency and across Scotland depend on it for their livelihood. Regardless of where people live in Scotland, Scotland’s farmers produce much of the food and drink that ends up on their dinner tables, so matters concerning the sustainability of the rural economy should concern us all. We know that Scotland’s farmers have already suffered massively and are continuing to suffer the effects of Brexit. Brexit has had severe consequences for the industry, caused by a loss of access to the single market, higher supply chain costs and the loss of common agricultural policy funding.

That is the context in which the UK chancellor set the UK budget. She had an opportunity to recognise those losses and take cognisance of the loss of certainty about long-term and sustainable funding that Brexit caused, and to show support for Scotland’s rural economy. The chancellor did not do any of that. Before the UK general election, there was a clear and united voice across Scotland that farming needed multiyear ring-fenced funding, which would have ensured the certainty that was there before we left the EU, but instead the Labour Government has left us with an inadequate settlement within the UK.

Scottish farmers need and deserve our support, not further uncertainty over funding cuts. Rural Scotland should not and cannot continue to suffer as a result of the decisions that have been made by the UK Government. It is exactly the constraints of devolution that are the problem. I am sure that we will hear from some members on Opposition benches about agriculture being devolved, but the Labour Government’s budget has completely overhauled the way in which post-EU agricultural funding is delivered to the devolved Governments. Previous ring fencing for agriculture and marine activity has been removed and funding has been baselined into the Scottish block funding, the overall size of which is subject to changes in public spending in England. That means that a decline in support for agriculture in England will have a damaging knock-on effect on the Scottish block grant.

The removal of ring fencing and the application of the Barnett formula to the funding was always a threat that hung in the air when Brexit happened, and now a Labour UK Government has gone ahead and done it. For all the reasons that we understand, Scotland’s farmers and crofters face challenges that are not found elsewhere in the UK. Our landscape is unique and our agricultural interests, capabilities and demands are different. As a result, Scotland traditionally and quite logically sought a bigger-than-population share of agricultural funding while we were still in the EU. In effect, we could now see a huge cut in funding for this crucial part of the economy, but it is hidden in plain sight by being rolled into the block grant.

For a UK Government that is so keen to be seen to be promoting economic growth across the UK, that is a very confusing message. Investment in rural communities and industries has long been understood to be a crucial strategy for stimulating national growth, and strengthening rural economies creates a more balanced and resilient economy overall. Long-term funding was a certainty during our EU membership, and that has been stripped away. The announcements that were made by the UK Government were for one year only, so, however much the Scottish Government would like to deliver a multiyear settlement, it has financial information for only one year.

That all leads to one conclusion: either the chancellor understands very little about Scotland’s rural economy, our island and rural communities, our food production chain and the many livelihoods dependent on it, and has made no effort to find out; or she knows but simply does not care, and her priorities lie elsewhere. The fact that she chose not to work with the Scottish Government on the matter or consult farmers, crofters and other stakeholders before the budget certainly paints a damning picture of how the UK Government views Scotland’s rural economy.

Unlike independent countries in the EU, Scotland’s rural economy does not have funding certainty. It is now reliant on annual allocations from the UK Government, which has failed to consult properly and could arbitrarily cut or change support from one year to the next. The situation is unsustainable. The UK Government must urgently reconsider and engage directly with Scotland’s rural communities to prevent a crisis in the sector.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

I apologise to Finlay Carson for accusing him of using offensive language; it was Colin Smyth who used it. Perhaps he would like to apologise.

Good morning to you, cabinet secretary, and to your officials. I put on record a declaration of interest, as I hold a bank nurse contract with NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.

Thank you for the update that you provided in your letter to the committee about the stigma action plan and the on-going work to address and challenge stigma. Can you give us a bit more detail about that work, and perhaps set out some of the timescales for implementing the plan?