Official Report 1029KB pdf
The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-16304, in the name of Rachael Hamilton, on tackling the rise in rural crime and equipment theft in Scotland. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament acknowledges the reported concerns regarding rising rural crime and its impact on communities across Scotland, including in the Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire constituency; notes that, according to NFU Mutual, the cost of rural crime in Scotland increased by 34.9% between 2022 and 2023, rising from £1.4 million to £1.8 million, contributing to a UK-wide cost of £58.8 million; recognises that 91% of those surveyed by NFU Mutual believe that rural crime is becoming more organised; notes that equipment and machinery theft, including agricultural machinery, construction equipment and power tools, has a significant financial and operational impact on farmers and businesses across urban and rural Scotland; acknowledges what it considers the effectiveness of technical preventative measures such as the CESAR scheme, tracking devices, immobilisers, PIN-protected GPS systems, and mechanical immobilisers, which it understands are more widely used in other parts of the UK; understands that the Equipment Theft (Prevention) Act 2023 was passed with cross-party support in the UK Parliament to address these issues; notes the belief that there is an opportunity to strengthen equipment and machinery crime prevention in Scotland, and further notes the calls on the Scottish Government to engage with industry experts, Police Scotland and victims to explore further action to tackle this type of crime.
17:14
I am pleased to open the debate on the rising threat of rural crime and its devastating impact on communities across Scotland. I thank my colleagues for listening.
Rural crime is not just a problem for farmers and others who live in the countryside. It affects the whole of Scotland, from the Borders to the Highlands, and from Aberdeenshire to Ayrshire, and even urban areas, where stolen equipment is often sold on or used for criminal activity.
The figures are stark. According to the National Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Society, the cost of rural crime in Scotland rose by 34.9 per cent between 2022 and 2023, reaching a staggering £1.8 million. That is part of a wider United Kingdom trend, with the total cost of rural crime now sitting at £58.8 million. Behind those figures are real people—farmers, businesses and families—who are left counting the cost, not just financially but emotionally and operationally.
The nature of rural crime is changing. It is no longer just opportunistic theft. Ninety-one per cent of respondents to a survey by NFU Mutual believe that rural crime is becoming more organised and sophisticated. Criminal gangs are systematically targeting agricultural machinery, construction equipment, power tools and even the GPS systems that are vital for modern precision farming. Such thefts not only lead to financial losses; they disrupt work, threaten food production and undermine the safety and security of rural communities.
Let me be clear that this is not just a rural issue. For example, if a farmer in the Borders has their tractor stolen, it could be sold on in Glasgow or used in further criminal activity elsewhere in Scotland or across the United Kingdom. When thieves strip GPS systems from farm machinery in Aberdeenshire, it affects food production that supplies all our supermarkets. This type of crime has a ripple effect right across the United Kingdom, impacting supply chains, businesses and consumers.
Other parts of the UK have taken decisive action to prevent equipment theft, but the Scottish National Party Government is lagging behind. The Equipment Theft (Prevention) Act 2023 was passed by the UK Parliament with cross-party support. It introduced tighter regulations to prevent the theft and resale of machinery ranging from tools to tractors. That was a significant step forward, but more must be done to strengthen crime prevention efforts here in Scotland.
We have effective tools at our disposal. For example, the construction and agricultural equipment security and registration scheme—CESAR—uses unique markings and tracking devices and has been highly successful in deterring theft in England and Wales, yet uptake for it in Scotland remains lower. Other security measures, such as immobilisers, personal identification number-protected GPS systems and mechanical deterrents, have also proven effective. Why are such protections not more widely encouraged and supported in Scotland?
The Scottish Government has a clear opportunity to engage with industry experts, Police Scotland and the victims of those crimes to develop stronger preventative strategies. That means better policing resources, more rural patrols and tougher action against organised crime groups.
I was surprised to hear that there is no clear, identifiable traceability for tractors, for example. I had not realised that. Should that be implemented in the UK as a matter of course, via either the UK Government or local authorities? I would like to see similar measures applying to quad bikes, off-road vehicles and e-bikes, for example.
Bob Doris is absolutely spot on. The Equipment Theft (Prevention) Act 2023 that was passed by the UK Parliament covered three aspects: the creation of a comprehensive database for registration of equipment; forensic marking; and the use of immobilisers. However, I would like us to go further in Scotland, because there is so much more that we can do. As I mentioned, the CESAR scheme is very effective.
Farmers, rural businesses and construction businesses are the backbone of Scotland’s economy. They work hard every day to build houses, provide food, maintain our landscapes and drive economic growth. They deserve to feel safe, and they deserve the Parliament’s full support in tackling the rising threat of rural crime.
I call on the Scottish National Party to take the issue very seriously, listen to those affected, engage with industry experts and take action to prevent such crime from continuing to escalate. Scotland cannot afford to fall behind on rural security.
I thank representatives of the following organisations for coming to my rural round-table event: the national rural crime unit; NFU Mutual; the Association of British Insurers; ATV Services Scotland; and Durham University. The Parliament very kindly allowed us to put a yellow JCB right in front of the building to demonstrate the CESAR scheme.
I look forward to hearing contributions from members, in particular Rhoda Grant as a Labour member, because it is the Labour Government that is holding up the issue for Scotland. All that it needs to do—as I have asked for time and time again—is have the Minister of State for Policing, Fire and Crime Prevention, Dame Diana Johnson, publish the consultation responses and move forward with regulations as secondary legislation. We can then move forward in this Parliament to support all the aforementioned people. We in Scotland are a soft target, and I look forward to hearing contributions from other members on this issue.
We move to the open debate.
17:20
I remind everyone of my entry in the register of members’ interests, as I am a farmer myself.
I congratulate my colleague Rachael Hamilton on bringing to the chamber an interesting and important debate, and on her on-going work in developing an equipment theft bill for Scotland that is akin to the Equipment Theft (Prevention) Act 2023 that was passed at Westminster.
It is quite shocking to realise, looking at Rachael Hamilton’s motion, that the cost of rural crime in Scotland increased by £400,000 between 2022 and 2023, from £1.4 million to £1.8 million. That is a pretty staggering increase. As well as costing our farmers more money, rural crime is having a much wider impact on our rural communities.
Scottish Land & Estates notes that the constant threat of rural crime and the impact that it can have on farm business is a key driver of poorer levels of mental health in the rural sector. Not only that, but we know that the increase in rural crime means that those who are on the front line of Scottish agriculture are now forced to make a decision on whether to spend more money on security measures and the associated increased costs of insurance rather than investing elsewhere in the business.
Although more work is needed to see where such instances of rural crime are more common, we know that more rural and sparsely populated areas are often easier targets for such crime. The Highlands and Islands, which is the region that I represent, is no exception to that.
I commend the efforts of Police Scotland, and in particular those officers on the front line in rural communities, for their work in liaising with our farmers and crofters to prevent and investigate theft in circumstances that can often be difficult. However, it is worrying that rural crime and machine theft “is becoming more organised”, as NFU Mutual notes in “Rural Crime Report 2024”, its most recent report on the subject. The report states:
“There is strong demand and value for used equipment across the world and intelligence has revealed some crimes are being committed by well-organised crime groups with international links.”
In addition, it is no secret that there are fewer front-line police officers in Scotland now in comparison with when Police Scotland was created in 2013, and organised criminals know that. That is why more must be done to invest in rural policing so that farmers have greater confidence that this growing problem can be tackled effectively.
I cannot speak in the debate without talking about fly-tipping. Not long ago, I was in my house, which is at the end of a dead-end street, and I watched a van come along and park up. I did not think anything of it, and it disappeared 10 minutes later. However, as I drove down to pick up my kids later that day, I saw a massive pile of car waste and rubbish sitting there. Fly-tipping is such a big problem in our communities, and we must tackle it.
I could not believe it—I went down with my tractor later on and picked it all up, and two minutes later, I had taken it to the dump in Buckie. I thought, “This person has driven further to drop this stuff near my house, and it has taken them longer than it would have taken them to go to the dump in Buckie, which is open pretty much all the time—it doesn’t make sense.” I put out a call, here and now, that more people should just stop fly-tipping, as it makes no sense whatsoever.
As I said, I commend Rachael Hamilton for the work that she is doing on a machinery theft bill. Such legislation should already be in place, and we want to see it come in. GPS trackers are readily available, and we should be putting them on machinery. It is amazing, when I look around my farmyard and start calculating what things are worth, to see—even where those things are old—just what the value of everything is, and it is all just laying out there. We should put GPS trackers on those things.
Finally, I note that I had the pleasure of being at the Turriff show a couple of years ago with the Scottish Partnership Against Rural Crime and Police Scotland. SPARC is doing amazing work to tell farmers of all the options that are currently available to them, so I say to any farmers, or anybody living rurally, who may be listening to the debate that they should go to its website and have a look. I hope that we see Rachael’s bill coming to Parliament in the future.
Thank you, Mr Eagle—always full names, please.
17:24
I, too, congratulate my colleague in the neighbouring constituency on securing the debate. Over the many years during which I have represented Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale, I have been well aware of the impact and incidence of what is termed “rural crime”, which is defined by NFU Scotland as
“any crime that occurs in a rural location or affects any person living, working or visiting a rural location”.
I thank the NFUS in particular for its briefing.
Relative to the population, the volume of rural crime is lower than in urban locations. However, the knock-on effect in a rural community or environment often has a much deeper and more far-reaching impact, both on the victims and on the community as a whole. I note that Police Scotland, in recording crime, does not—I believe—categorise crimes as rural or urban. As a result, therefore, neither Police Scotland nor the Scottish Government have data on “rural” crimes such as the theft of agricultural machinery, plant or fuel or timber; it is simply recorded under the wider category of theft.
We therefore rely on the NFUS for the most recent figures, which are highlighted in the motion and to which other speakers have referred. They show the cost of rural crime in Scotland rising from £1.4 million in 2022 to £1.8 million in 2023. The number of claims has risen by 22 per cent. Claims for machinery theft cost £1.1 million in 2023, and claims for the theft of quad bikes and GPS kits cost £335,000 and £363,000 respectively.
Farms are seen as easy targets, and for obvious reasons it is difficult to self-police.
I thank the member for taking an intervention, and I declare an interest as a partner in a farming business.
The member talks about the cost. There is also the cost of delays to undertaking work, and the impact, for example, of losing a quad bike in that it makes the job harder. All those things—just going by the insurance figures—are also huge costs, not only financially but in terms of farmers’ time.
I can give you the time back, Ms Grahame.
Thank you. I absolutely concur with what the member said—that is strange for us both, is it not? Anyway.
The Scottish Borders partnership against rural crime brings together key organisations working together to tackle that crime, in particular the increasing threat that is posed by serious organised crime groups that operate most often to order. They cannot put a tractor or a combine harvester up for sale on eBay—they have stolen it knowing exactly where they are going to sell it. The partnership includes—as one would expect—Police Scotland, the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, the NFUS, Scottish Land & Estates, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, the River Tweed Commission and the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, which are all working together to prevent and combat rural crime.
There are some measures that those in the farming community and beyond can take to help. If people see something suspicious, out of the ordinary and out of place, they can, if intervention is needed immediately, phone 999, or otherwise the 101 number, or they can report anonymously through Crimestoppers or even on the Police Scotland website. They should not, however, put themselves at risk by confronting intruders, no matter how angry and compelled to do so they may feel, because these are really serious criminals. People can put in place measures to deter and prevent such crime—for example, marking, tracking and securing their farm machinery and tools—including in the areas that are most impacted. If those measures are taken, that must surely help to reduce insurance premiums.
Indeed, many years ago, I suggested to Police Scotland that it should have a stall at the Borders shows where farmers could discreetly report their concerns, in particular about the theft of livestock. I knew that farmers often felt guilty—although they should not—because they thought that such thefts could somehow have been prevented and that they were not protecting their livestock. Farmers have to remember, however, that these criminals are well organised. They have scoped out their targets and have the delivery all in hand, even shipping abroad. It is very difficult to combat such crime, therefore, as it is not casual these days.
I ask the Scottish Government, therefore, whether it would be helpful if Police Scotland categorised rural crime as I defined earlier, thus providing invaluable data to help detect and deter. Lest we get lost in figures and data, however, I stress that each and every rural theft is personal. It is distressing to the victim or victims, and must make them feel very insecure in their remote settings—let us not forget that.
17:29
I, too, congratulate Rachael Hamilton on bringing the debate to the chamber and on the excellent work that she has done, locally and nationally, on the potential bill that we could—I hope—pass in the Parliament.
I refer members to my declaration of interests, as my wife is a police sergeant with Police Scotland. I say that because I will mention policing, as Tim Eagle did.
One of the issues in more remote and rural areas is the availability of police resources. Christine Grahame was right to outline what people should do when they see a crime—phone either 101 or 999—but it reminded me of something that I was told just a couple of weeks ago. I was at a family funeral up in Ardgay when I heard that someone had witnessed a theft out in a forest, in a very remote area. The theft had been on-going when they saw it, so they phoned the police. That is up in the Highlands, but the nearest available unit was up in Wick, so it would be well over an hour before it got to the situation. That is a problem, and criminals are taking advantage of the fact that they know that the response from the police will very often be quite slow—if they come at all—because police resources are very stretched.
It is right to mention, as Tim Eagle highlighted, the cost of machinery, which farmers know very well. However, Christine Grahame was right to speak about the cost of livestock, too. Some of the livestock on our crofts and farms across Scotland have an extremely high value. For example, there are the tups that we see being sold at the sales, and there are cattle and even sheepdogs. There have been sheepdog thefts across Scotland. Those dogs are highly trained and a lot has been invested in them, and they are being stolen in addition to machinery.
My intervention is a comment on the theft of sheep, which has happened in a farm in my constituency. It was obviously a shepherd who had stolen the sheep and taken them down the old drovers’ road. It was in the middle of nowhere, and the farmer did not find out until months later, at a specific time of year, that he had lost so many sheep.
It is very difficult. As members who watch—as I do—“This Farming Life” and such like will know, sheep are often in thousands of acres of hill. It can be the case that it is only at one point in the year that a farmer recognises that there has been theft, and by then it is too late to get evidence to prosecute someone.
It is sad, but it is a reality, that some thefts—a minority of them—are perpetrated by fellow farmers. We have to accept that, but we will, I hope, see such thefts minimised and, ultimately, eradicated.
I spoke with my local chief inspector, Mike McKenzie—who is the local area commander for Moray, based in Elgin—about rural crime in our area of my Highlands and Islands region. He gave me a good overview of what is currently happening, and he spoke about the north-east partnership against rural crime. The partnership is chaired by Police Scotland—it just so happens that Chief Inspector Mike McKenzie is the current chair—but it brings in a lot of other bodies, such as the NFUS, Scottish Water, Scottish Land & Estates and local authorities, to name just a few, and they are working together to support rural communities through prevention and education. It is important that they educate people on what resources they have available to support farmers and protect them from theft, and that they encourage farmers to take up those resources.
Mike McKenzie spoke about the partnership’s work in Banff, where it spoke to an NFUS group about economic crime and fraud against farmers, so farmers are getting more information from it. He also told me about the campaigns that are being promoted. One such campaign, which will shortly be promoted at the royal northern spring show, is the “Police Stop Me” campaign. It will involve vehicles having a sign saying “Police Stop Me”, which encourages police to stop them at certain hours of the day when one would not naturally expect them to be doing farming activities. It might be that those vehicles are, at that time, being driven by someone who has stolen them. Such campaigns are very useful and important.
Chief Inspector McKenzie offered me the opportunity to meet our rural crime reduction team in Moray to hear further about its plans. After tonight’s debate, and given the work that Rachael Hamilton has done, I will certainly be taking up that offer. I hope to hear tonight from the Minister for Victims and Community Safety positive comments about things that we can do to tackle the issue, one of which would be to support Rachael Hamilton’s proposals for a bill.
17:33
I, too, thank Rachael Hamilton for securing the debate and for hosting the drop-in session with NFU Mutual and the national rural crime unit. That highlighted the issue of theft of equipment, with the incidence of such theft and the costs increasing. Although insurance companies quite often pay out for such theft, the cost of insurance is borne by everybody who holds a policy, so it is not a victimless crime, and it adds to the cost of running farming businesses. In addition, as other members have mentioned, the personal impact can be enormous.
The cost of rural crime has increased by 35 per cent. Other members have mentioned the Equipment Theft (Prevention) Act 2023, and it would be good to hear from the minister whether the Scottish Government has looked at perhaps introducing legislation similar to the 2023 act. It would also be good to hear whether there are ways in which the Scottish Government could help to incentivise the installation of anti-theft and tracking devices, which would be very useful for those who have large and expensive pieces of equipment.
The increase in rural crime is happening at a time when rural police numbers are falling. I raised concerns some time ago about island policing with the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs. At that time, there was a situation on Uist and Eriskay in which no police were on duty when a serious incident had to be dealt with, so off-duty officers had to come in to deal with it. They had to work, and hold a prisoner, overnight—they should not have been working those hours while they were on duty, far less while they were off duty. They were working extremely long hours with no policing cover at all.
Sadly, those who commit crimes in rural areas know that that is the case for policing throughout rural Scotland. Although islanders have some protection against equipment theft—because thieves would need to get the equipment off the island undetected, which is difficult when they are sitting in a ferry queue—they do not have protection against other forms of crime. Things such as bank closures, for example, have added to rural crime. Since 2015, there has been a 60 per cent decline in the number of bank branches, and rural Scotland has borne the brunt of those closures.
In the Highlands and Islands, there has been a huge loss of bank branches. For example, there has been a 72 per cent decline in Caithness and Sutherland, a 66 per cent decline in Moray and a 65 per cent decline in Ross, Skye and Lochaber. Criminals know that cash-based businesses will be holding much more cash if there is no local bank branch to enable them to deposit it. We know that those businesses are being targeted; criminals know where to look.
The lack of police means that there are more break-ins and thefts of property, as well as, as has been mentioned, thefts of animals. Although tagging and traceability systems make it difficult to sell stolen animals on the open market, there are many outlets for cheap meat where no questions are asked about where it came from. I read recently that it is estimated that that led to £2.7 million of losses to farmers in 2023. There are also ramifications for food safety, because people are buying meat without looking at the traceability.
We need to ensure that there is not a rural-urban divide with regard to fighting crime. We need to ensure that rural areas are adequately policed and that police have the equipment to deal specifically with rural crime. I hope that the debate highlights those issues, and I look forward to hearing the minister’s response.
17:37
Crime in any form is abhorrent and distressing, especially for the victim, whether it is an individual, a family or a business. I must touch on Christine Grahame’s comments about the fact that a lot of crimes in rural areas are committed where people are on their own or at the end of long farm roads, with the police response often being miles away. Even neighbours might be far away. The police response in rural areas is often far too similar to that in urban areas. I have reported strange vehicles at the end of the road on which I live, which is quite remote, and the response that I get from the 101 number is less than helpful. A strange car at the end of a street in Glasgow is not the same as a strange car at the bottom of a rural driveway, and we need to appreciate that there are differences, as Rhoda Grant touched on.
Sadly, in the current climate of a sharp rise in inflation, it is becoming all too attractive for individuals and organised gangs to turn to crime in order to make a fast and easy profit. Regrettably, as we have heard, there has been a meteoric 35 per cent increase in rural crime in Scotland. It now costs the UK more than £53 million, with farm equipment and machinery proving to be a hugely attractive target for thieves.
That is why the members’ business debate that my Scottish Conservative colleague Rachael Hamilton has brought to the chamber is of vital importance, and I thank her for doing so. I whole-heartedly support her call for legislation in Scotland to tackle agricultural machinery and vehicle thefts, as it is becoming abundantly clear that tougher measures are needed if we are to break the vicious cycle.
In my Galloway and West Dumfries constituency, we have witnessed a number of thefts, which is possibly down to the fact that the ports at Cairnryan make it easier for criminals to get equipment out of the country to destinations across Europe. I recently met Superintendent Andrew Huddleston from the national rural crime unit, and he told me that Russia is becoming one of the favoured haunts for black-market agricultural vehicles, either to be used as spares or even to work on the land because of the trade restrictions that are in place.
He also said that criminals are becoming more sophisticated and organised, and thieves have been known to target several farms in one area in one night, using GPS to locate high-value equipment such as tractors and combine harvesters. It is worth mentioning that the cost of GPS theft has escalated sharply to more than £0.5 million. GPS is sophisticated equipment that is used to guide farm vehicles as they plough or seed, and it typically costs more than £10,000.
As we have heard, apart from the obvious financial loss, equipment theft gives farmers the additional headache of delays and disruption to subsequent harvesting and cultivation work. It is therefore clear that robust action is needed to assist the farming fraternity in any way, given that farmers do not exactly have their problems to seek at the moment—I will not even touch on the inheritance tax plans tonight. According to the general rule of thumb used by thieves and criminal gangs, if it is not securely bolted down, it is there for the taking.
Rural property has also been targeted, with even the lead on roofs being up for grabs, while bicycles, quad bikes and all-terrain vehicles are proving to be high on the hit list. In a bid to counter the rise in crime in Scotland, the Scottish Partnership Against Rural Crime has been set up to prevent and tackle rural crime, particularly the increasing threat that is posed by serious organised crime gangs throughout Scotland. The multi-agency approach intends to be more visible and to understand local and national concerns.
I thank all the parties represented in the chamber tonight. I believe that they will support Rachael Hamilton’s proposed bill that aims to prevent the theft and resale of stolen equipment and machinery in Scotland.
17:42
I am grateful to Rachael Hamilton for securing the debate and giving me an opportunity to respond.
Rural crime, such as the kind that has been outlined by members and by the member in her motion, is a serious issue. It can have hugely detrimental effects on communities, businesses and individuals. Our farms are the lifeblood of our communities. Those businesses, some of which have existed for hundreds of years, should not have to put up with that kind of crime, which is almost exclusively perpetrated by organised crime groups seeking high-value items that can be resold to fund other activities.
We have rightly spent some time discussing the theft of farm machinery, and I would like to spend a few moments talking about the work that the Scottish Government and our partners are doing, but I will address some of the points made by members before I get into that.
Rachael Hamilton and Rhoda Grant raised the Equipment Theft (Prevention) Act 2023, so it might be helpful to give members a bit of insight into where the Scottish Government is on that. It was a private member’s bill that received Government and cross-party support down south. It was given royal assent on 20 July 2023 and it commenced in January 2024. It prohibits the sale of prescribed equipment without an immobiliser or a unique identifier.
Perhaps because it was a private member’s bill, Scottish Government officials were not aware of it until we were approached by Police Scotland in late May 2023, when we found that there was insufficient time to fully consider the implications of the bill for Scotland, given where it was in its passage through Westminster. There are no immediate plans to replicate the Equipment Theft (Prevention) Act 2023 in Scotland, although the Scottish Government is awaiting further information on the impact of the act in England and Wales, as that could influence future decisions.
Rachael Hamilton mentioned in her motion several initiatives that are working well and I am always happy to meet the member and stakeholders to discuss how we can improve things with respect to rural crime.
In past question-and-answer sessions in the chamber, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, Angela Constance, has very much welcomed that act and said that the Scottish Government was working with the Home Office. That is exactly the point that I made to Rhoda Grant: all that the Labour Government needs to do is publish the consultation responses and take forward secondary legislation through regulations; the Scottish Government can then enact the intention of the 2023 act. It is a really simple thing for the Government to do. We need to consider it because of that cross-border movement. Not only farmers but criminals move their equipment, and I do not want farmers to be left behind. It is really important that we replicate the act in Scotland.
Minister, I can give you the time back.
I am not aware specifically of what the cabinet secretary has commented on, but I am happy to raise the issue with her. I am sure that she will be happy to send a letter to the UK Government, if that would be worth while.
Christine Grahame mentioned Police Scotland’s differentiating urban and rural crime in its data categories. That is a very valid point. Christine Grahame will know that that is an operational matter for Police Scotland, but I am happy to raise the matter to see whether Police Scotland has any concerns or is progressing any work in that area.
I appreciate that it is a matter for Police Scotland. I mentioned that when I addressed the point. I am sure that insurers could help, because they will know what they are insuring and whether a theft was in a rural or urban area. We should therefore start with the insurers.
I thank Christine Grahame for highlighting that valid point.
Douglas Ross highlighted important issues about good partnership working, which is important. Having antisocial behaviour in my remit, I am acutely aware—
Minister, I encourage you to speak into the microphone.
I am acutely aware of how important it is to have partnership working with local authorities and local police—with lots of stakeholders—because they know the area best. Douglas Ross has highlighted some important work that is going on in his constituency.
I move on to the work that the Scottish Government and partners are doing to prevent rural crime and mitigate its impact. Disrupting organised crime and diverting individuals away from it remains a priority for the Scottish Government and partners on the serious organised crime task force. However, in a rural setting, much of the work that is aimed at preventing organised crime is done through the work of the Scottish Partnership Against Rural Crime, which has been mentioned several times. The Scottish Government continues to work with partners across SPARC and through the continued expansion of the local partnerships against crime across Scotland. This sort of theft is a priority for the group.
The rural crime strategy for 2022 to 2025 was launched on 24 June 2022. All members of SPARC were involved in its drafting. The strategy adopts a holistic approach. Among other things, it aims to ensure that those members are alert to and understand local and national concerns that relate to rural and environmental crime and promote and improve rural community and environmental wellbeing whereby people can flourish and feel safe. The strategy sets out seven rural crime priorities, each with its own action plan. Those include the theft of agricultural and forestry machinery, plant and quad bikes and all-terrain vehicles.
As I have suggested, only by working in partnership can we hope to tackle this menace. SPARC and the local partnerships recognise the crucial role of working together towards a common goal. To do that effectively, they share intelligence on organised crime groups that operate across borders and provide specific information to the rural and farming community on how best to secure equipment and prevent its theft, as well as addressing the other crimes that are noted in the strategy.
Earlier, we heard from Tim Eagle about fly-tipping. Is fly-tipping one of the priorities that was listed, and what actions is the Scottish Government taking to reduce fly-tipping in rural areas?
There are seven areas—I have them written down. Fly-tipping is one of the priorities of that strategy.
SPARC and the local partnerships also demonstrate crime prevention measures in relation to the marking, tracking and securing of farm machinery and tools, including in the most highly impacted areas. I fully appreciate that such theft is a significant concern to our rural communities and that it can have serious consequences for the agricultural sector in terms of cost and confidence. However, there have been some positive strides forward in relation to both the number of crimes reported and the associated cost of this crime on rural communities.
Police Scotland’s recent update on the work of SPARC highlights that in January 2025, a total of 69 rural crime incidents were reported, which is a decrease—albeit a small one—in the number of reported incidents across Scotland, with nine fewer reported crimes and offence incidents compared with the same period last year, when there were 78 crimes.
Where we see a clear difference in relation to the reduction in rural crime is in its total cost. In January 2025, that cost totalled £188,250, with a total of £44,400 having been recovered. That is a decrease in the monetary value of rural crime compared to the same period last year. In January 2024, the total reported rural crime figure was £221,675, but the recovered total at that point was only £16,500. Therefore, I hope that members can see that there has been a small but positive step in the past year.
The method of working with the SPARC model has proven so successful that Police Scotland is using it as the template for the Scottish partnership against acquisitive crime—known as SPAACE—which was created around 18 months ago to bring a partnership approach to preventing a number of forms of theft and fraud. It is at the forefront of efforts to tackle retail crime, which members have heard me talk about in the chamber previously.
On our support for Police Scotland more broadly, in 2025-26, the Scottish Government will increase police funding to £1.62 billion to support police capacity and capability. We are also providing almost £57 million in additional resource funding, which is an increase of 4 per cent compared with the 2024-25 published budget. That will support front-line service delivery and allow Police Scotland to make progress in key areas of transformation as outlined in its three-year business plan, which includes a strong commitment to delivering the best service for communities around Scotland, including those in rural areas.
I have made clear to members the sometimes devastating impact that rural crime can have on our farming and rural communities. I hope that the information that I have provided today gives members some assurance that the Scottish Government will not be complacent. We will continue to work with Police Scotland and other SPARC partners to develop and implement strategies to combat those perpetrating such crimes.
Thank you, minister. That concludes the debate.
Meeting closed at 17:53.Air ais
Decision Time