Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you. I see the convener giving me the eye.

Given the importance that you place on the future of agriculture, should there be a consent mechanism to ensure that the Parliament can maintain those funds rather than divert or defer them?

This is a new one to me, cabinet secretary. You have mentioned the oenological practices and restrictions that will be brought in through the regulations. Will you explain what they are? You have also said that, according to some of the consultation responses, there would be no impact at all from the regulations. Is that because there is no real data on the amount of ice wine that is consumed in Scotland?

No.

One of the civil servants, John Kerr, told the committee that it was a “semantic point” with regard to whether the UK Government had promised multi-annual funding until the end of the current Parliament. Would you say that it is multi-annual funding?

I want to challenge Professor Macdiarmid on the concept that vegetables could be cheaper if horticulturalists were supported. Seasonal vegetables such as kale, turnips, potatoes and cabbage are very affordable right now. What mechanism do you believe could be implemented under the bill to allow horticulturalists ultimately to produce those things for free for customers? That is what would happen through the lens of the bill.

My question is for Lesley Mitchell. You are absolutely right that our approach should be about viable farming within the objectives. The bill talks about thriving rural communities, but not about the viability of farms. The committee recently visited a progressive arable unit in the Borders, at Colin McGregor’s place at Coldstream Mains. He described to us what he had been doing over the years on low tillage and low inputs. He described his approach as regenerative.

My point is that if we do not have an objective to ensure that we de-risk farming and that there are viable farming units, the term “regenerative” means nothing. It is just a label that allows a Government to describe farming in a certain way because it wants to meet a net zero target; there is no meat on those bones. That is what we are missing here. Without farmers actually being sustainable, we cannot achieve net zero.

It is just an observation, convener. Yesterday, we received the response to a Government-initiated question on the timetable for the forthcoming land reform bill. A number of our witnesses today have mentioned cross-cutting legislative areas that minister should have regard to, one of them being land reform. Given that that bill has been delayed, I think that it is incumbent on the committee to seek clarification from the cabinet secretary, Mairi Gougeon, of when we will see a draft of it, so that we can consider that alongside the Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Bill.

Considering the recent cuts to the agricultural budget, would you be confident that the rural support plan will be accompanied by the resources that you need to achieve the four objectives that have been laid out in the bill?

To go back to the rural support plan, are you saying that, to achieve the four objectives, the money that the Scottish Government puts in should be ring fenced for agriculture?