Chamber and committees

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.

The industry has repeatedly told us how important it is that we get the new agricultural support system right, given the importance of the proposed bill and the Scottish Government’s commitment to listening to the sector.

Co-development, co-design and discussions with farmers and crofters are fundamental to that approach, which is in contrast to the shambles that the environmental land management schemes have caused south of the border. Does the cabinet secretary share my view that it is right that we take our time and that we need no lessons from the Tories when it comes to safeguarding the interests of farmers, crofters and growers in Scotland?

I was at one of the committee’s evidence sessions just a couple of weeks ago, as a substitute member. We heard that data that might help us to figure out better approaches, such as on the uptake of the products that I mentioned, is missing. There is not a lot of data around that. Does the member think that that might need to be worked on as well?

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.

Okay. We have six commissioners and an ombudsman. With the potential for future commissioners, does the Scottish Government need to look at how we can ensure that a more strategic approach is taken to resourcing and establishing additional commissioners? Is work being done now to look at that?

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?