Seòmar agus comataidhean

A number of targets are listed elsewhere, particularly in relation to emissions reduction, and we know that that is also being considered through the natural environment bill. For me, it is not necessarily about introducing new targets. What will be critical, as I have outlined in previous responses, is the monitoring and evaluation of targets. We already have statutory targets to meet, so it is about how we set out the pathway to achieving them.

You are right that the status quo exists until such time as we make transitions through the route map, as we have set out. We do not want any cliff edges in relation to support. We are not intending to surprise anybody with anything that comes forward. What is important is that we have the powers under the framework to enable us to consider such issues.

I do not know whether John Kerr wants to say anything else on that.

I understand the committee’s concern about that. That is why we are taking an overall framework approach to the powers that we are taking. Ultimately, we need to have those powers, otherwise we would automatically rule out being able to do, discuss or take forward a lot of things. That speaks to the changes that we are looking to introduce. We have talked a lot about the route map and setting out some of the information.

I hope that I have been able to emphasise and illustrate throughout the meeting the importance of co-development—working with our farmers and crofters—in developing all of this. It is not in our interests or in the interests of the wider industry for there to be any surprises or cliff edges. We are categorically committed to not providing that for our farmers and crofters. Ultimately, as I have set out, we want to design the system with them and to see what mechanism will work best.

We will take seriously any recommendations that the committee makes in that regard, but we have also had correspondence with the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee about the powers that we are taking and the instruments that we are looking to use in relation to them. We have touched on a couple of areas in which that committee had recommendations, including moving from the negative to the affirmative procedure or reconsidering one of the other instruments, but the committee was broadly content with the responses that we gave in relation to the powers there. As it stands, I am content with where we are on the basis of what the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee has expressed to us.

However, the particular power that you have referred to involves a specific power for a very specific purpose. We responded to the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee on that issue. In fact, the power is similar to another power that was taken in, I think, the Environmental Protection Act 1990; Andy Crawley might have more information on that. We thought that, because the proposed power was broadly similar to the power in the 1990 act that is also subject to the negative procedure, it could be done in the same way. The proposed power in the bill is not as broad as the power in the 1990 act and is for a very particular purpose.

There is a lot in that, so forgive me if I miss anything.

You can correct me if I get anything wrong. Are you asking about the later parts of the bill, where we talk about the continuation of the various schemes?

We have set out in the route map what our transition will be and for how long we expect current schemes to stay in place. The powers in the bill will ultimately enable us to do that.

You touched on the sunset clause. It is felt that it is unusual for an enabling power to have a sunset clause attached to it, so that is why we want to repeal the sunset clause. It is just not all that helpful. It would be better for us to repeal it and ensure that we have the time through the transition than for us to set a firm end date for when we should have used it by. Again, it is about providing flexibility and enabling the transition that we have set out in the route map.

It will give information on the transitions that can be expected as well, but the route map broadly sets out when we expect the new parts of the framework to come into effect.

Again, it is not the intention that the code is to be used in that way. As I hope I have outlined, we intend the code of practice to be helpful to our farmers and crofters rather than a tool for cross-compliance or anything else.