Seòmar agus comataidhean

Yes, I would be happy to set that out for the committee and show what will be available. On top of that, as you were speaking, I was reminded that we also provide funding for the Scottish dairy growth board. That is another example. We have a number of different funding schemes to help industry both directly and indirectly. I would be happy to set that out for the committee to provide transparency.

We have not as yet opened the round for the coming year, and we are considering that at the moment. Over the past couple of years, we have had to have more restricted rounds because of the capital situation that we have faced. It is all part of what we are considering at the moment, but, again, I would be happy to take that point away and consider it for future iterations of AECS.

The fact that the funding has now been Barnettised, in essence, means that we will be tied to that. I will hand over to George Burgess, who will be able to provide more detail.

Your characterisation of the position is absolutely right. As I have said to the committee previously, we were absolutely not where we had hoped to be in relation to woodland grants and support for forestry creation, because of the significant cuts to that budget over the course of last year. However, it has been really positive to see the increases in the budget that we have allocated to forestry, with an increase of 18 per cent this year.

As you have outlined, and as you have heard from different stakeholders in evidence, we will not meet the 18,000 hectares target. The peak of the planting over the course of last year was 15,000 hectares. We had been on such a positive trajectory, and it is really unfortunate that, because of last year’s budget cuts, we were not on track to meet the 18,000 hectares target and will still not be on track to do it this year. I go back to your characterisation of the situation as like trying to turn a tanker around, because it is going to take time to build that figure up again.

Even if there had been an even bigger increase in the budget for woodland creation or the funding available for Scottish Forestry, I do not know whether all of that could have been used. We have to match the funding to projects that we know can come through the pipeline. I hope that, now that there has been an increase in funding, we can continue on a positive trajectory and rebuild confidence in the sector, so that it can continue to plan and invest.

I am more than happy to provide further information on that, because it is the case across the portfolio. For example, we tend to transfer our allocation for peatland restoration to different agencies that deliver the work on our behalf.

I have been up front and honest about the impact. I have heard strong views in my engagement with different parts of the industry, including environmental non-governmental organisations, industry representatives and different businesses, and that point came across loud and clear.

It was particularly disappointing. As I have said to the committee, we were on such a positive trajectory and had planted 15,000 hectares—the highest-ever level—so to take that step back was bitterly disappointing. We had significant problems with capital funding right across Government last year. Every portfolio faced difficult choices, and the situation last year was particularly challenging. I never want to be in a position again of having to make such decisions and such significant cuts.

I must look to the future. We have to try to bring back or rebuild that confidence in the sector by ensuring that we maintain and increase funding in the years ahead, to enable us to reach our targets. You are absolutely right, and I was open about this last year: we were not going to meet the targets with the funding that we had available. We were trying to work within the funding that we had and trying to adjust it to maximise planting. About half of the funding applications that we receive through the forestry grant scheme come from smaller farms and businesses, and it is important to continue that support. I want to continue on that positive trajectory from here, so that we can rebuild towards the target and not be in the position that we faced last year.

You are absolutely right, and we recognise that as an area that needs focus and attention. I do not know whether the committee is aware of the UK task force that has been established to consider woodland creation, in which the different Administrations come together to talk about the work that is taking place, about where it makes sense for us to work together and about whether there are areas where we could consider collaboration. Skills is one of the key areas, and you are absolutely right to focus on that.

Around the start of last year, I think, I hosted a woodland creation summit at which a mix of stakeholders from industry as well as from ENGOs considered the key challenges and how we could work together to tackle them. It was a really productive session and a lot of actions were taken on the back of it. Work is now being undertaken to see how we can encourage people to consider forestry as a career of choice, because there is no doubt that we are going to need the skills.

We have a number of working groups, and the industry leadership group is bringing together another part of the sector, so I offer the assurance that a lot of work is under way to consider the matter. I will meet the chief forester in a couple of weeks’ time to discuss the plans and the key areas of focus. As I have said in previous responses, I hope that we are on that positive trajectory. I recognise that there is work to do in all areas—in woodland creation, on the timber and production side of things and, importantly, on skills—but we are taking action in each of those areas.

I hope so. I hope that I can get us back on track and on to a positive trajectory. I have not shied away from—indeed, I have very much confronted—the challenges that last year’s budget presented, particularly in relation to forestry, but we have heard completely what stakeholders have said to us about that.

We must also consider what will be deliverable over the course of the coming year. There would be nothing to gain from massively increasing the budget—if that were possible—if the money was then not spent because the projects were not there. We must be careful about the allocations, because we all want to see them fully utilised.

I realise that confidence has been dented. We want to repair and build it again, and I believe that the budget that we have before us is a step in the right direction.

The budget for NatureScot does not fall within my portfolio, and I do not have overall responsibility for the agency, so I am not too clear what the implications would be. As I mentioned, we provide funding to NatureScot through the farming with nature programme. The funding would be provided specifically to carry out that work, if it is to go ahead. It is hard for me to provide more detail as to exactly what that would mean for NatureScot, because I have not had discussions on that with it.

You have raised a number of hugely important points, and there are a few things that I want to touch on.

The presentation of the figures has not helped in any way. What looks like an overall budget cut is based on the budget revision. When you compare it with the original 2024-25 budget as it was published, you see that there has been a 1 per cent increase in the funding—I want to be clear on that point. It is more of a presentational issue, because of the changes in the way that the budget has been presented.

I visited Aberdeen recently to see the marine directorate—I have visited it previously—and I understand the committee’s concerns about the site in Aberdeen. The directorate carries out vital functions for us in relation to science, compliance, enforcement and a number of different areas, as well as all the work that is being undertaken in relation to the marine environment. I believe that the directorate undertakes that role very well, and we are continuing to invest in the marine directorate as a whole.

I will touch on some of the particular issues that you raised. In the pre-budget committee evidence, we covered in some detail committee members’ concerns about the estate in Aberdeen. At that time, I outlined the establishment of a project board to look at short-term measures for some of the issues at the site as well as at the medium-term and longer-term plans. That work is still very much under way.

It is important to highlight that, as challenging as the estate in Aberdeen is, there has been significant investment over the past few years. Around £9 million has been spent on the estate, but further work is planned over the course of the coming year as we work towards longer-term solutions on the site. I listened carefully to the evidence that the committee received and to the concerns from a variety of stakeholders, and we are continuing to invest in the marine directorate because of the vital functions that it undertakes.