Seòmar agus comataidhean

Should specified functions that relate to food policy areas and that are being driven by the Scottish Government be co-ordinated via primary legislation? We have talked about things such as procurement, supply chains, green spaces, allotments, food education, fair work and other important strategic goals in our aim of creating a healthy and sustainable Scotland, including meeting the net zero targets. Should that be put on a legislative footing and given teeth, or should they be dealt with by secondary legislation?

Should the islands be recognised separately in NPF4, and why is the Isle of Bute included in the central belt regeneration area?

Does it concern you that there is no mention of land use strategy in NPF4?

I want to move on to the role of planning decisions when it comes to the long-term public interest. We know that forestry management is delegated to Forestry and Land Scotland and that the approach is dictated by the economics of a global market. Long-term plantations of single species do not create local employment, so how can the Scottish Government’s climate change policies, including on the plantation of forestry, sit well with NPF4 when it talks about ensuring that we increase the number of local people in employment and the development of houses and so on?

I put this question to Mike Rivington. How can diet and land use be married up in relation to the land use strategy?

I am interested in what—I think—Mike Rivington said about changing people’s minds, behaviours and psychology. Out of 66 consultees on the bill, 21 said that food education is an important part of a good food nation. Food education is in the curriculum, but it is not core; it is deemed, possibly, a secondary subject. Should food education be in the bill?

That is a great answer.

I want to pick up on the disagreement within the group giving evidence today. Some believe that targets are suitable and some believe that they are not. I know that there is disagreement on that in this room as well.

Yesterday, at the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, Maree Todd said that there was a worrying increase in childhood health problems, with 15.5 per cent of primary 1 children at risk of obesity last year, which is up from 10 per cent in 2009. We know, because Karen Adam mentioned it last week, that it is a peculiarity of the modern food system that obesity sometimes coexists with hunger. Per calorie, bad diets are much cheaper than healthy diets.

I want to open that up to the panel, starting with Kirsteen Shields. In your opinion, without targets in the bill, how can those various dietary and environmental issues be dealt with? I appreciate that you have said that you do not necessarily support targets. It is important for the committee to home in on that and know why.

May I develop my question?

Dr Fletcher has identified that there are existing policies that could run in parallel with the Good Food Nation (Scotland) Bill. Are there policies or areas that forthcoming legislation will deal with that you would like the bill to address, notwithstanding the comments that have been made about the need for targets? Would you like the bill to contain new policies that could change dietary habits? I will start with Claire Hislop.