Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you, minister.

I have a question. You said that when the Scottish and UK Governments issued a joint consultation on removal of the derogation, 70 per cent of all respondents across the UK and 84 per cent of respondents in Scotland agreed with the proposals. However, that suggests that there was still a significant number of people who did not agree. Can you give us an idea of the general position of the stakeholders who did not agree with the derogation?

This is from the consumer side of things. In order to avoid public confusion about the effects of the regulations, the public and the media will, according to the policy note, be informed of the introduction of orders. How are you going to do that in practice? Are you going to have a television campaign in Scotland or just in certain areas? What you have said is that, if there is a housing order for Dumfries and Galloway, there will not be a media campaign in Dumfries and Galloway alone, so we are potentially talking about the whole of Scotland. How in practice will the Government inform the public and media of housing orders going beyond the 16 week-period that people are aware of?

As there are no more questions, we move to agenda item 4, which is formal consideration of the motion to approve the instrument. I invite the minister to move motion S6M-14816.

Motion moved,

That the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee recommends that the Free-Range Egg Marketing Standards (Amendment) (Scotland) Regulations 2024 be approved.—[Jim Fairlie]

Motion agreed to.

Thank you.

In effect, then, despite the extension to 2030, there is no detail in the route map beyond 2027.

But we should make it clear that it only has to be passed 40 days before 1 January. It does not have to be today.

Good morning, and welcome to the 25th meeting in 2024 of the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee. I ask everyone present to ensure that their electronic devices are switched to silent. We have received apologies from Beatrice Wishart and Rhoda Grant, and Elena Whitham and Colin Beattie are joining us remotely.

This morning’s business is consideration of an affirmative Scottish statutory instrument, the Rural Development (Continuation of Operation) (Miscellaneous Amendment) (Scotland) Regulations 2024. I note that the Scottish Government has issued a correction slip to the explanatory note accompanying the regulations.

I welcome to the meeting Jim Fairlie, Minister for Agriculture and Connectivity, and his Scottish Government officials James Muldoon, head of the agriculture support policy and development unit, and Lewis Kerr, who is a lawyer.

The committee considered the SSI at an earlier meeting but agreed to defer further consideration until today. Since we last heard from the minister, the committee has held a short call for views on the instrument, to which we received 19 responses from stakeholders. The minister also wrote to us about the instrument on 27 September.

I invite the minister to make a short opening statement.

No, but we hear that all the time in the correspondence that we get. We got the message from the Institute of Auctioneers and Appraisers in Scotland, Scottish Land & Estates, the Scottish Tenant Farmers Association, the National Sheep Association, the Scottish Beef Association and the National Beef Association that they are all in the dark about the consultation in relation to retargeting and rebasing specifically. They feel that they are not being consulted, and they have concerns that, in effect, ARIOB’s terms of reference and its role in all this need to be reviewed.

In addition, you have often referred to the NFUS, but that is only one membership organisation, so there is concern that the consultations and the co-development are not happening at this stage.

Yes, but my question is this: what is the downside of extending the deadline to 2027 instead? What are the negative impacts? What is preventing you from extending it to 2027 rather than 2030?

Okay. Are there any other comments?