Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you.

That evidence was really interesting. Both of you spoke about a compulsory sale or compulsory purchase test. Would that help to deal with some of your concerns about late registration and the community right to buy?

Have you spoken to the Scottish Crofting Federation about that, as well? It will impact more of its members than NFUS members.

Those maths do not really work for a small farm that has lost 5 to 10 per cent of its income because of this system. Having a slightly higher level of payment for the rest of the calves does not make up for that. I am not asking for every circumstance in which the force majeure process might apply; I am asking how the process is triggered. How can a farmer who is faced with a situation that will be devastating to their business go to the Government and say, “I need you to look at this”?

I have concerns about that, because it tends to work against small herds, especially those on poorer land. Grass-fed animals are a better carbon sink, so this one-size-fits-all policy will create more carbon emissions in some areas, as well as welfare issues for cattle that are not ready to breed. Farmers might be forced to have them breed, because they would otherwise lose out on the money. Has the minister given any thought to derogations for small herds and herds on more difficult land, so that practices that are much more nature-friendly are not be shut out of the scheme, which would be an unintended consequence that nobody would want?

I will push you further on that point, because it is a really important consideration for me in deciding whether to support the instrument. How can someone raise concerns? I am not asking you to go into every possible circumstance in which there could be a derogation, but this issue could be the difference in relation to whether a herd can continue. How can someone trigger the process to get the Government to look again at the matter, and how quickly can that happen? For example, if, this year, we end up with a number of small farms that cannot meet the requirement, how can someone get the Government to look at that and get the derogation in place? Those small farms do not have the ability to wait it out.

There are concerns, though, that native breeds and the like have a longer gestation period, and that the regulation could work against them. Waiting to see whether small farmers who are breeding cattle go out of business to determine whether the scheme is working is counterproductive because, once those animals are gone, they are gone, and we would be looking to force farmers to slaughter cattle way before they should be. While the cattle are alive, they are a carbon sink.

I have one point of clarification. Is it the case that, if we do not agree to the instrument today, the scheme will continue but without the new conditions being applied?

We spoke earlier about microjellyfish and the like. When we visited fish farms, we spoke about what actions are taken to avoid microjellyfish. Would it be possible to have the ability to move fish farm cages? When microjellyfish in the area were coming towards a fish farm, would it be possible to move that fish farm? Given that planning consent and where to put the fish farms is so complex, could there be the ability to move them in an emergency? We have heard about fish being moved but, if the farm could be moved, that might be less traumatic for the fish.

On that theme, we are aware that jobs are hard to find in rural areas, and that the jobs provided by fish farms can have an economic benefit in allowing people to remain in rural areas. What consideration is given to that when looking at planning consents for fish farms?