Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you, convener, and good morning.

Thank you for inviting me to speak to the draft Free-Range Poultrymeat Marketing Standards (Amendment) (Scotland) Regulations 2025. This draft instrument amends European Commission regulation 543/2008, on the marketing standards for poultry meat, with regard to the 12-week derogation period that is allowed in the event of a housing order being implemented. The EC regulation lays down provisions relating to the “free range” farming method, in which, in order to classify as free-range poultry meat, the birds must have continuous daytime access to open air runs. At present, the poultry meat marketing standards regulations allow a derogation for poultry meat to be marketed as free range for only the first 12 weeks of any housing order that is introduced. Following that, the labelling of poultry meat cannot refer to “free range” and must be changed. The instrument that we are discussing will remove that 12-week limit and allow free-range producers to label the meat as such for the full duration of a housing order.

You might remember that, last year, we amended the egg marketing standards regulations by removing the 16-week derogation so that eggs could continue to be marketed as free range, regardless of how long hens had been housed under temporary housing restrictions. This instrument amends the regulations for free-range poultry meat in the same way, ensuring a consistent approach across the free-range poultry meat and free-range egg sectors.

Members will be aware from the committee papers that the United Kingdom Government and the Scottish Government consulted on this jointly, and the results of that consultation show that the removal of the 12-week limit on the derogation is the preferred route for the industry. There were 79 responses in favour of the change, including from a significant Scottish poultry meat producer that is part of the main supply chain.

Although the sector in Scotland is evolving as a result of recent investment, with a current capacity of around 4.8 million birds across poultry meat farms, there are currently no commercial free-range poultry production premises in Scotland. Nevertheless, in progressing with this change, we will be in line with the rest of the UK, and the move will also future proof the legislation and perhaps, through reducing costs during housing orders, provide an incentive for any potential Scottish free-range poultry meat producer to commercially produce free-range chicken in Scotland. Not making the changes could further disincentivise any future free-range poultry meat production in Scotland, because of the additional requirements, and costs, during housing orders.

Outbreaks of avian flu in recent years have unfortunately required housing orders to be put in place in the UK. In 2021 and 2022, they covered the whole of the UK, when they were extended to 22 weeks, thereby exceeding the derogation periods for poultry meat and eggs. In 2022 and 2023, England, Wales and Northern Ireland put in place a 23-week housing order, which also exceeded the derogation periods. Although the current risk of avian influenza in poultry is low, it is expected that the UK might face outbreaks of the virus in the future. As such, a long-term approach to the issue is the most practical route to take, and, as I have mentioned, it is important that we keep the sectors consistent.

In essence, the proposed change is small but practical in allowing poultry meat to be labelled as “free range” for the full duration of the housing orders that are put in place for the birds’ health and welfare. Current legislation already allows that to happen for a substantial period of 12 weeks.

I hope that those remarks are helpful in setting out the rationale for the instrument, and I am happy to answer members’ questions.

Other supermarkets are available.

The same principle will apply. If someone wants to market their product as free range because that suits their business model and it is the kind of model that they work in, they would have exactly the same concerns as anyone else. If they want to continue to sell a free-range product when there is a housing order, it is in their best interests to ensure that their consumers know that.

Those birds would not already have free-range status; under this instrument, the birds would already need to have that status. This only works when a housing order is put in place by the chief veterinary officer. Somebody with indoor chickens cannot claim that they are free range if they do not already have that free-range status.

Yes.

I have not given any consideration to that on the basis that we do not have anyone in this country right now who is doing free-range poultry meat. There might be measures in England that Joe Kirk is better versed in and can tell you about.

Even if a housing order were in place, they would not be able to apply for free-range status unless they had all the other things in place that they would need to have in place to be a free-range producer. They would not be registered as a free-range producer at that point.

I agree. I seem to remember that we had a similar conversation when we were talking about the derogation for eggs, so we had a discussion before I came to committee about how we would be able to give that assurance to consumers. So far, we have seen that supermarkets are keen to make sure that people understand what is happening with their food supply, because it is in their best interests to do that.

I could be wrong, but I think that we talked previously about whether we should be able to compel supermarkets to tell people that there is a housing order in place. We have looked at whether that is feasible, but at the moment, it is not necessary because supermarkets and retailers are very comfortable with the fact that if there is a housing order in place, it is in their best interests to make sure that consumers know what is happening. We do not have any concerns on that point at the moment.

I am sorry, but if there was a second point, I have missed it—I apologise.

No. Joe Kirk and I were discussing that just before we came in. In the early days—Joe will correct me if I am wrong—officials went out to see what supermarkets were putting on their eggs to make sure that the labelling was compliant with the requirement that the information is relevant and not misleading. If there was a housing order in place, the label would say that the eggs are from a free-range flock, but that the birds were currently housed due to avian flu, or words to that effect—I remember seeing that in Tesco.

From our point of view, there are no concerns that supermarkets would not continue to have the view that it is in their and the consumers’ best interests to understand exactly what is going on at any given time.

I am not sure how we tackle zoonotic diseases in a transient wild bird population. There needs to be an understanding that we have transient and migratory bird populations, which is why they are rises in avian flu at certain times of the year. I do not know how you eradicate that in the wild, if that is your question.