Chamber and committees

I welcome the debate and the Scottish Government’s future vision for agriculture. As always, I welcome the briefings from NFU Scotland and Scottish Land & Estates. It is paramount that we hear the voices of industry in these debates.

Scotland’s farmers are the backbone of our nation. Farmers provide and support thousands of jobs across our country, and, as colleagues have said, they produce the food for our dinner tables and are the custodians of our land. I agree that it is vital that any future agricultural policy recognises the contribution that they make to Scottish society, the health of our nation and our national food security.

With Brexit, the pandemic and now rising inflation, this period has seen some of the most challenging times that the sector has ever faced. There has been a catalogue of failures from the UK Government to protect the interests of Scottish farmers. One example is Brexit, but there is also the UK Government’s abject failure to secure trade deals that protect our agrifood sector. Indeed, our food standards across the UK have been put at risk due to recent trade deals. I have raised that issue previously in the chamber.

Despite the challenges, our farmers and crofters must be commended for their resilience. The Scottish Government is determined to support them over the next few years. Part of its vision for agriculture is to support our agricultural sector to reduce emissions and for the sector to help, as it is doing, in Scotland’s fight against the global climate emergency. Around 50 per cent of the emissions in the agriculture sector come from livestock. However, it is important that the Government supports farmers to adopt not only the low-carbon technologies that exist currently but those that will become available in the future through technological advances. I will focus on those advances.

Farmers might need to make choices to reduce the livestock, given their own choices, so I would be interested to follow that further and see where we are. We heard in the committee from Chris Stark about some of the challenges of farming in areas such as Alasdair Allan’s region, which is peatland. One shoe does not fit every part of Scotland. We have a diverse farming sector across the country and we need to take that into consideration when we look at our future agricultural policy.

I return my focus to technological advances. Many of those can and do support our wider environmental goals. That includes the use of precision farming techniques to reduce the need for polluting fertilisers or pesticides so that we can support biodiversity.

The new biological advances cover a range of areas, including feed additives directed at reducing enteric methane emissions. Remote sensing technology, and associated monitoring, data gathering and analysis, also support our farmers to make the best emissions-reduction decisions. Moreover, technologies sourced from non-agricultural sectors—for example, digital ledgers, which are tools used to track and manage supply chains, business finance and information sharing—are also helpful for agricultural business.

In addition, 3D printing is emerging as a tool to help farmers reduce emissions. On Monday, I was invited to Borders College’s Hawick campus, where I heard about the green potential of 3D printing and the other excellent techniques that are being taken forward to develop green skills in the future.

I am particularly interested in the role of bioscience in improving agricultural efficiency and reducing agricultural emissions. Products such as Pro-Soil, Pro-Fortis and Bovaer, as well as Biocell, which is produced by Biocell Agri, work hand in hand to support increasing output while reducing emissions.

I am impressed with some of the products that apply natural methods to enhance cell walls in plants. That improves disease resistance, improves mineral uptake and enhances soil quality.

We are on the cross-party group on rural policy together. It is quite enjoyable when we get to hear evidence on what is out there. You mentioned the 2005 subsidies and said that that system was not right. Does that not mean that, when future support schemes are developed, we can learn lessons from the past and make things better?

I am right out of time—I am sorry.

I will conclude by saying that the Scottish Government has serious concerns about the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, which affects our ability to make decisions in Scotland and is impeding the devolved aspects of agriculture.

I look forward to the cabinet secretary’s response.

We heard from Dr Henrietta Hughes, the Patient Safety Commissioner for England, who produced a report reflecting on her first 100 days in the role, which considered what the remit could be and what could be explored more widely. Could that approach be used as a way to measure how we take the role of the patient safety commissioner forward in Scotland? The report could be made to Parliament.

I am sure that the role will evolve, because different projects will be undertaken and problems will be solved. For instance, an approach that works in one session of Parliament might be different to what works in another session.

It was interesting to read that the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body said:

“The process is complicated, but we are moving into a period in which it is becoming regarded as a casual thing to suggest and implement the establishment of another commissioner”.—[Official Report, Finance and Public Administration Committee, 10 January 2023; c 20.]

That is not the language that I would have used, because I think that ensuring patient safety and addressing and preventing harm are absolutely reasonable. I say that as a former nurse who worked in situations in which there were issues in operating theatres. I am interested in knowing what you would say about the evidence that was submitted to the Finance and Public Administration Committee about the establishment of a new parliamentary commissioner or new commissioners becoming “a casual thing” that takes insufficient account of the associated budgetary consequences for the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body. I ask that on behalf of the Finance and Public Administration Committee.

The report is interesting. I have a couple of questions. One is about the report’s recommendations regarding the fun side of sport. Not all women want to be elite athletes. If they do, we give them support to develop. There is a difference between being competitive and engaging with or participating in sport. What did you find out about competition versus participation for fun?

My other question is about the types of sport that are offered to young women and girls. Were you able to determine—by local authority, for instance—whether there was a wide variety in the sporting activity on offer? Jenni Snell mentioned that some facilities might only be in Edinburgh or Glasgow. For instance, the Edinburgh International Climbing Arena seems to be increasing in popularity, and a lot of schools have climbing walls and things like that. However, in Dumfries and Galloway, where I am from, which is rural, people have to go to Carlisle or Edinburgh to compete, or even just to have fun.

I am interested in whether you carried out an audit of the sports offer. There is such a variety of sports, such as track and field, cross country, team sports, individual sports and gymnastics. I have had an opportunity to experience kayaking, which I absolutely love, although it is a bit scary on the water. Did you conduct an audit of the offer for young women and girls?

The minister will know that I am interested in the remit of the patient safety commissioner as far as it covers advocating for people and groups of people. For 20 years now, people in the south-west corner of Scotland have had to get radiotherapy in Edinburgh instead of going to Glasgow, and that means unnecessary travel. I am interested to know whether that might be something that a patient safety commissioner could pick up on by advocating for and listening to people who are really upset after 20 years of asking, “Why am I driving past the Beatson and going to Edinburgh for my radiotherapy treatment?” Could a patient safety commissioner advocate for, listen to and support a specific group of people such as the one that I have just described?