 The next item of business is a statement by Fergus Ewing on common agricultural policy, a plan to stabilise future payments. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of his statement so there should be no interventions or interruptions. I call on Fergus Ewing for up to 15 minutes, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The Scottish Government is committed to ensuring eligible rural businesses who apply to the Scottish Government for support under the common agricultural policy receive their entitlements promptly and in full. That must also be done in full compliance with the prevailing regulatory regime. I am clear, however, that although improvements have been made, we have not fully achieved that aim during the current common agricultural policy cycle. Continued action is needed not just on the substance of how we deliver payments but on the way we conduct our business to ensure that our customers are at the centre of our approach. How we arrived at this point is important in understanding how we move forward. Good progress has been made in delivering the rural payments and services system compared with 2015 and 2016 but challenges remain. The policy and the legal environment is extremely complex. Decisions taken to design our systems were done in full collaboration with our partners. A customer-focused approach but one that undoubtedly added more complexity. The future policy and legal landscape is far from clear when it comes to the UK's approach to Brexit negotiations. However, the risks to Scottish agriculture and farming are very real without clarity and soon. Even more concerning is that agricultural policy hitherto devolved to the Scottish Parliament, Presiding Officer, is at risk of being re-assimilated by the UK Government through the EU withdrawal bill. Despite all this, my role as Cabinet Secretary remains clear. I will continue to work to ensure that our eligible rural businesses who apply for funding can get paid in full and on time. My firm commitment is to offer our customers a CAP service as well as the right tools that are fit for purpose, not just today but tomorrow as well. With the closure of the CAP 2016 pillar one payment window in June, the Scottish Government has captured lessons from a rapid review of delivery. Those complement findings from Audit Scotland's reports in 2016 and this year. I am therefore today publishing a common agricultural policy plan for stabilisation. Copies will be available to members immediately and online. The plan aims to target specific and sustainable improvements in our strategic approach, business and IT processes to deliver value for money and compliance with EU regulations. The plan also prepares for the business for an uncertain future and throughout looks to improve the quality and timeliness of engagement with customers. I would like now to cover briefly the key areas within the plan. In order to deliver payments in full and on time, we will continue to tackle the major causes of poor customer service error and payment delay by investing further in our business and IT systems. This plan is based around five key aims. First, payment to customers will be made on time in full and compliantly with relevant law. Second, customers will have a more consistent and responsive service when interacting with our staff. Third, customers will be empowered to take more direct control over their applications and land information. Fourth, the tools that we use and share with customers, including our IT, will reflect the needs of customers and business now and in the future. Fifth, we will support the development of our people and drive efficiency in our business processes. Those aims are supported by six focused areas of improvement, and I will take those in order, starting with what our customers experience. I have visited most of the ARPID offices and I have spoken to the excellent staff who work in them. They have a huge commitment to their work. They are trusted and they are appreciated by our farmers and crofters, but I and they want to do more and do better, so we will improve the customer experience through the publication of service standards so that customers know what to expect and what their obligations are when applying for funding. I am also providing much-needed clarity and certainty for farming businesses by publishing a schedule of key dates. That schedule includes all pillar 1 and 2 schemes, application windows, inspection windows and those for our loan schemes. In addition, we will be improving the timeliness and accuracy of customer letters and streamlining our guidance. We will improve our relationship with our customers through the use of modern communication channels so that we can better understand their needs. I can confirm today that, in that spirit, we have already made efforts to contact the few remaining ELFAS 2015 customers who have neither received their payment nor applied for a loan to discuss their circumstances. To stabilise payments for those recently applying, I have agreed with the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Constitution the financial backing to announce today a new loans scheme for eligible basic payment scheme customers who applied this year. The scheme will provide equivalent funding, not at 80 per cent, as was the case last year, but at 90 per cent of their estimated entitlement. In terms of timing, I understand that the period from November to the year end is often an important time for farmers and crofters to make major spending decisions. That is why I am announcing the loan scheme now, so that, compared to years past, when CAP payments will be paid in December or January, the overwhelming majority of farmers will be able to access almost all of their funding from November. No doubt, that will be a real practical help from a business point of view, and that does not detract from my commitment to accelerate CAP payments through the work that is set out in the plan itself. Customers will begin receiving letters by the end of September, and I would very much encourage the swift return of the necessary paperwork by farmers and crofters to be sure of a November payment. I wish to turn to ELFAS. By publishing a schedule of key dates today, I am making known what I hope to achieve for ELFAS customers. For those who applied in 2016, our payment processing is beginning this week, and I expect the majority of payments by the end of October. For those customers who applied this year, that means ELFAS 2017 scheme payments beginning in May 2018. ELFAS payments are complex and from a technical standpoint dependant on the full processing and validation of BPS entitlements. That complexity has always meant that they are subject to possible delay. However, I am today committing the Scottish Government to starting payments to ELFAS customers in May next year. I will assess progress in early 2018, and if it is clear that we cannot start those payments in May, I will bring forward a further ELFAS loan scheme payable from April. That would be at 90 per cent of eligible claim value and ensures that eligible customers will receive virtually all of their claim as expected. To support that work, we will simplify our business, and in doing so, we will free up capacity to help us to deliver customer service and excellence. We will limit the scheme changes that we make that cause complexity, and we will pilot new ways of undertaking land inspections to improve efficiency, turning to land information management. We propose to implement a new system of land information management from early next year, giving farmers the ability to verify the data that we hold already and be able to update it directly and online. That change represents a major improvement in business efficiency and will in turn reduce errors and move significant activity away from a challenging part of the payment cycle. To complement that change, we will encourage and support all remaining paper customers to apply online from SAF 2018 to build on the 78 per cent online SAFs that were received last year. That will reduce data errors and improve our ability to process applications on time. As the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Economy and Connectivity, I am doubly aware that some farmers and troffsters are still not comfortable with using the internet for this purpose. I have weighed on the benefits of a compulsory approach to applications and decided not to make online SAF mandatory. Instead, we will provide our customers all necessary support through our area offices, including one-to-one assistance. The plan also looks to tackle our historic IT challenges. We have taken on board the many criticisms and comments that are levelled at our IT system, so we will continue to build a reliable IT platform that meets customers' expectations and is marriage to best industry standards and in line with a new digital strategy. We have agreed with CGI, our IT delivery partner, to deliver the functionality that is needed to make the payments accurately and on time. We will continue to implement major changes to our planning and governance systems and to use them to deliver enhanced benefits and value for money. We will continue to improve knowledge transfer and disaster recovery plans across all our business areas. I recognise that farmers, foresters, crofters and businesses need to forward plan, often years ahead. I am doing everything that I can to provide stability to help them. The UK Government claims to be doing the same. It talks about EU funding for, I quote, farm support being matched until 2022, but businesses can take no comfort from that so-called guarantee because there is no clarity about what it actually means. The only scheme-specific commitments that we have so far from the UK Government are for pillar 1 and ELFAS payments for those who apply in 2019. Meanwhile, farmers need certainty to plan their crops, foresters need certainty to plan new woodlands and rural businesses need certainty to plan for growth. The minister for UK negotiations on Scotland's place in Europe, the cabinet secretary for finance and constitution and I are seeking clarity about that as a matter of urgency. In summary, I have listened carefully to what farming businesses, crofters and national bodies have said. What I have been told is that people want a system that provides certainty. Certainty is the bedrock of confidence and confidence is vital if businesses are to invest. That is why I took action to implement the loan scheme last year. It is why I am implementing a BPS loan scheme this year and it is why I am pre-announcing a possible loan scheme for ELFAS next year. Although I am taking the tough decisions to ensure that the underlying cap payment systems are stabilising and improving so that one day we will not need loans at all, above all, the plan puts the customer first and prepares us for the uncertain world ahead. I am happy to take questions. The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues raised in his statement. I have got up to 30 minutes for questions and after that we will move on to the next item of business. I wish to ask a question and press the request-to-speak buttons now. I call on Peter Chapman to be followed by Rhoda Grant. I wish to refer members to my register of interests. I thank the cabinet secretary for prior sight of his statement and I welcome the promises that are set out in the minister's statement. It is about time that we had a coherent plan on the next steps regarding cap payments. I welcomed the loan scheme, which I called for in my speech last week, and I also welcomed the simplification of the systems and the processes. To farmers and crofters, what Fergus Ewing has outlined today is, I am afraid, still too little, too late. Nonetheless, it shows an appreciation of a problem that needs solving. Presiding Officer, let's never forget that we have seen farm debt rising by another £113 million this year to an all-time high of £2.32 billion. We have seen farm incomes fall by 75 per cent over five years and by 48 per cent in the last year alone to a completely unsustainable level of only £12,600 per busnes, and we have seen three years of chaos on farm payments and farmers in despair and unable to pay their bills. The cabinet secretary has made promises here today that the IT problem created under his watch is now partially fixed. With that in mind, will he now get on with the job of turning around the fortunes of Scottish farming, something that he should have been concentrating on all those years that the cap fiasco was unfolding? How is he going to resolve the basic unprofitability of Scottish farming, which has continued to worsen under his Government? Fergus Ewing. Presiding Officer, first of all, I am pleased that the Conservative spokesman welcomes the loan scheme, and I believe that it will be welcomed across the farming community. I think that it is a pragmatic and practical response to the difficulties that we have had, and from the many, many farmers that I have met as I have travelled thousands of miles around the country over the past year, one thing that I have learned is that farmers are pragmatic and practical people, and they have to be. Therefore, to pay 90 per cent in November, I think that it will be welcomed as a practical step. I hope that the statement about the undertaking that an ELFAS loan will be available should one be required will also provide that certainty that farmers look for. I am aware, of course, of the publication of the information about levels of farm debt. I understand that, in the United Kingdom, from the information that has been made available to me, Presiding Officer, there are two sectors of the economy where debt has risen, where banks have been lending, one is farming and the other is utilities. Actually, the situation is broadly similar across the whole of the UK. That does tend to suggest that the reasons for rising debt may be substantially that farmers have sought and I welcome it to invest and improve their holdings in a new combine, to invest in a shed, and that perhaps may explain part of the level of debt levels rising. However, from the figures that I have from banks, debt levels have been rising since 1994, namely 23 years. I understand that the statistics also show that the level of debt—this is just an average figure as a total in the sector—is equivalent to 8 per cent of the capital value of the farms. I do not think that it is correct to conflate the issue of borrowings with financial difficulties. However—I want to make this point and I will finish on that if I may make it—where there are farmers who are in serious financial difficulty, I have instructed the RPID offices to treat cases of financial hardship very sympathetically. That is very important, particularly since farmers tend to be very proud people who are perhaps not prone to seeking help as quickly as others might do. That help is available in extreme cases and I am grateful for the opportunity to make that clear today. Rhoda Grant, who will be followed by Emma Harper. Thank you and I would also like to thank the cabinet secretary for a prior site of his statement. The cabinet secretary said that sorting out the shambles was his top priority, and that was 16 months ago. Yet he appears to have made no headway. Today we are told that the fiasco is on-going with the announcement of a further loan scheme. A 90 per cent loan is cold comfort to somebody who has not received any of their 2015 payment to someone who is afraid to take out a loan because it is unclear as to what their entitlement is. Can I ask the cabinet secretary if he can give us an indication of when the system will be fit for purpose and when farmers and crofters will be paid in full and on time? Fergus Ewing. I am sorry that the Labour Party has not welcomed the loan scheme. It does seem a little bit churlish, but there we are. That is really up to them. I do not accept the picture that Rhoda Grant has painted. That is why we have, in respect of the basic payment scheme in 2015, paid 99.9 per cent. We have, in respect of the basic payment scheme for 2016, paid over 99 per cent. In respect of the ELFAS payments for 2015, all but 312 have been paid. Only 26 have not received either an ELFAS loan to provide interim financial support. Some of those businesses may not be eligible for ELFAS, however, 16 appear eligible and were indeed offered an ELFAS loan previously, but declined it. We are in the process of contacting those businesses to discuss their precise circumstances. I mention those figures because it matters greatly to me that we help people who have not received either a loan or payment, but they are now a very, very small minority. Those are the facts. I hope that, at some stage, Opposition politicians and the Labour Party will recognise that those are the facts. The facts are that we are performing, the system is fit for purpose, we have a plan, 99.9 per cent is quite a good exam result by any standards, and therefore my consideration is not political posturing, it is to get on with the day job and that is what we are doing. I am delighted to hear that the majority of farmers in my area should be expecting to access almost all of their funding from November, bringing some stability to what is in the uncertain future. Can the cabinet secretary expand on whether or not the ambiguity around Brexit and the potential threat that it poses to Scotland's farmers and rural communities has helped to prompt that action from the Scottish Government? We have announced the plan today and the potential ELFAS loan scheme, because those are the right things to do. I think that they will provide a degree of certainty that is required, especially in the light of the uncertainty and the lack of clarity that Emma Harper mentioned. After all, we are only 18 months away from the proposed Brexit day. Farmers plan things over a long period and there is no answer or confirmation or clarity about what schemes will be supported by the UK Government post 2019, such as ELFAS or pillar 2 payments. That means forestry, it means leader programmes, it means arpit programmes, it means environmental programmes. All of those, there is no certainty, no information whatsoever about any of those schemes post 19, which is only 18 months away. My advice to Michael Gove is to get on with the day job and start proposing some answers and, above all, clarity and certainty to our farmers and crofters. Edward Mountain, to be followed by Stuart Stevenson. Presiding Officer, I would like to refer members to my register of interests. At last, I can welcome some suggestions from the cabinet secretary, too late, but an acceptance of fault. I do say that it lacks ambition, with 95 per cent of basic payments still to be paid by the EU deadline and no solution to the original problems. As this is the cabinet secretary's own plan, should he be unable to meet these key dates and times, he should be aware that Scotland will not accept the simple solution of him investing more money and taking on extra staff to resolve the issue. Is he therefore prepared to accept now full responsibility for what is now definitely his own plan? Yes or no answer would do, cabinet secretary. Fergus Ewing I have never shirked responsibility in any way whatsoever the buck stops would be. That continues to be the case. I am confident that we will meet the BPS 95 per cent target this year. Last year, we were at 90 per cent, where we fell short, sadly, which was a frustrating experience, but most important, the impact on those farmers who did not receive their full payments in time is something that troubled me greatly. I accept responsibility. It is a yes answer from Mr Mountain, and I am confident that this year we will deliver the main target of 95 per cent. Why? Because we have a strength and management team who have now been in situ and in place, have their feet underneath the desk and have worked with me over the summer months to produce this solid plan. We have strength and governance in place, and we have had collaborative and successful dealings with CGI. I have also seen and made it my business to see as I travel round shows and arped offices and forestry Conservancies offices over the summer that the staff too are appreciated for the work that they have done because they are the ones at the sharp end at the front end, and indeed they are hugely trusted and appreciated by the farming community. The buck stops with me. I entirely accept the responsibility. Failure is not an option this year, Presiding Officer. I am entirely confident of that. Your turn will come, Mr Rumbles. Stewart Stevenson, to be followed by Jackie Baillie. Has the cabinet secretary seen that the UK Tory Government is setting aside £230 million for fines to cover its basic payment failures in 2015-16, which would suggest a prorata cost in Scotland of around £41 million? What is the Scottish figure? I am aware of the reports of the scale of the disallowed experience in England in 2015-16 reported as £230 million. We are not forecasting disallowance on that scale here in Scotland. As previously reported to Parliament, we have estimated late payment penalties for 2015 at around £5 million and for 2016 at around £500,000 to £700,000. However, it will be some time before final totals are available following due diligence carried out at EU and UK levels. All member states carry the risk of wider disallowance and Scotland is no different, but I can inform members that, over the past 10 years, disallowance has amounted to around 1 per cent of total cap expenditure, which is broadly within Torrance levels and compares reasonably with other parts of the UK. My job is to get on with the work in Scotland, and that is what I am focusing on. Jackie Baillie to be followed by Mark Ruskell. Can I welcome any improvement in the funding streams so that we can ensure that farmers and crofters get their payments on time? Can I push the cabinet secretary on whether a risk assessment has been carried out in relation to financial penalties from the European Commission? I notice that he mentions late payments in 2015 and 2016, but there was also an estimate done by Audit Scotland for control weaknesses, and that was estimated at as much as £60 million. Can I ask the cabinet secretary what amounts have been set aside and in which budget year will they fall? I thank Jackie Baillie for what appears to be a welcome of the loan scheme. Rhoda Grant did not welcome it, but Jackie Baillie did, or at least that is what seemed to be the case, but maybe there are two views. As far as the general figures are concerned, in 2015 the report opined that the total aggregate penalties and disallowances, if I recall those figures correctly, would be between £40 million and £120 million. As I said, our indicative figure is £5 million. In 2016, the general estimated that the total would be up to £60 million, and our figure in respect of late payment penalties is around £500,000 to £700,000. Now, Jackie Baillie would say what about disallowances, and disallowances are, of course, thoroughly considered. I am considering those matters in great detail with officials. I can assure you that the assessment of those matters is a routine, necessary and standard part of the Government that continues. I work very closely with my colleague and friend Eric Mackay and his colleagues in the finance department to ensure that the taxpayer in Scotland is protected against any disproportionate penalties and disallowances. As soon as those figures have been clarified, which will certainly not be for some considerable time, I will, of course, inform Parliament, as I always do. Mark Ruskell, to be followed by Mike Rumbles. Thank you, and I thank the Cabinet Secretary for Advanced Copy of the Statement, and also the schedule of key payment dates that accompanied it. However, I noticed in reading that schedule that the Environmental Cooperation Action Fund will remain under review, as it has been for the last two years. Given to use the Cabinet Secretary's own words, the fund is a practical and pragmatic way to support farmers who want to co-operate with each other on vital issues such as flood management. When will the fund be reopened so that we can allow farmers to do the important job of protecting our rural towns from flooding? Mr Ruskell makes an important and constructive point, and there are audit issues with the environmental fund. Of course, there are other funds such as AICS, which have been operating to ensure that environmental payments are made. Nonetheless, I will look into the matter and give Mr Ruskell a detailed reply very shortly, indeed, to when we would expect that particular scheme. Mr Ruskell says that it makes a very important contribution to alleviating flooding in various ways and other schemes, too. I will write to him about that as quickly as possible. When will the cabinet secretary take action to call in stakeholder experts from producers, environmentalists and consumer groups to design the bespoke system of agricultural support which Scotland actually needs post Brexit? Fergus Ewing. We have already taken a number of steps by involving experts. Indeed, that followed a parliamentary debate, in which an amendment by Mr Rumbles was accepted. We are already doing what he asks us to do by having a panel of advisers, our national council, which I will be meeting later this month, and they will provide advice as to the opportunities and indeed the challenges in Scotland. I engage all the time with the stakeholders that Mr Rumbles referred to. Of course, we want to be able to design our system in Scotland, but at the moment, Presiding Officer, we have not had clarity from the UK Government that there will not be a power grab of the powers that rest in the EU about agriculture and fisheries. We have no clarity about that, nor do we have, as I have already said, any clarity about what the future of funding will be for pillar 2 and certain other payments post 2019. Nor do we know whether the UK proposes that the in-farm support that it has promised will be for the existing schemes or on some other basis. Nor do we know what the budget will be, despite the fact that the budget will be for rural payments, despite the fact that, during the Brexit campaign, several senior UK Government ministers promised that funding would be at least matched. Once we get some clarity from the UK Government and I am to meet Mr Gove in the 25th of September, then, of course, we will be able to carry on with the task of designing a better system in Scotland, but we are already taking substantial steps, detailed advice and stakeholder engagement to proceed with that work and progress it. Clare Hockie, followed by John Scott. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The added certainty for farmers and crofters is most welcome, and I wholeheartedly agree that we should be getting this money into the pockets of our farmers where it belongs as soon as possible. I note that the cabinet secretary stated that farmers will be receiving letters by the end of September. How do the Government plan on advertising this to farmers across Scotland to make them aware of the welcome news and ensure the swift return of the necessary to be sure of a payment in November? Thank you, Clare Hockie, for that question. The letters of offer are being issued at the end of this month. Clare Hockie is quite right that we need to promote that. I know that the specialist agricultural press will do that very effectively, as always. The purpose is to make sure that all farmers and crofters are fully aware that this money is for them. I want to say something about the loan scheme. Last year, 74 per cent of the basic payment offers were accepted, so why did 26 per cent not accept it? There are a number of points that I want to make to farmers. There is no interest on the loan unless, in the unusual and very rare event that the loan exceeds the entitlement. Even then, there is no interest unless the recoupment of the excess over the entitlement is paid after 30 days. Therefore, farmers should not worry about burdening themselves with loan interests. Secondly, that money is for farmers. Some farmers, perhaps because of altruism or moral integrity, feel that they would be taking money away from the NHS or schools or hospitals. Not so. That money is for farmers that are entitled to it, and we want them to take up the maximum value of the loan. I am grateful to Clare Hockie for giving me an opportunity to make those points clear. I also thank the cabinet secretary for the advance copy of his statement and declare an interest as an LFA hill farmer. While I welcome the cabinet secretary's intention to start the 2016 LFASS payments next month in October, he will be well aware that this is five months late this year, and to for stall all that is happening next year, he is pre-announcing next year's LFASS loan scheme as well today for May 2018. All those loan schemes and IT uncertainty add cost to an already hard-pressed industry now £2.3 billion in debt to our banks. Can the cabinet secretary tell Parliament today when the IT system will finally work and when the LFASS payments will cease and farmers will be paid in full what they are entitled to and on the due date, and will he also apologise in advance to our farming community for next year's anticipated failure to deliver their agreed entitlements in full and on time? I believe that most farmers and troffters welcome the loan scheme as a pragmatic solution to a problem that arises as problems arise in life. I am sorry that we have not been able to pay all of the payments on time. Of course I am. I have made that absolutely clear. That remains the case. I have never tried to shirk or get away from that in any way whatsoever, but I do think that if someone receives £90 in November as opposed to £100 in January, that is a pragmatic solution. It is not perfect but it is a pragmatic solution. What I have said and I have committed to this and I am confident that it will happen is that the time schedule for the basic payments, the time schedule is that 95.4 per cent have to be made by the 30th of June next year. I am confident that that timescale will be met. We came close to it last year. I am confident that we will meet it next year, but in the interim it is correct and prudent for me to say right at the beginning of this parliamentary term that we want certainty and clarity for farmers, and that is why I have pre-announced a possible el-fast loan scheme if it proves to be necessary. By not making the online single application forum mandatory and offering support, including one-to-one assistance, that will significantly reduce pressure on some of our farmers. Can I ask the cabinet secretary if the Government has any estimate as to how many of our farmers expects to help with this form of support? We did make significant progress last year in the number of applicants of the SAF, and the basic application forum submitting them online. I think that the figure now is 78 per cent for memory. Therefore, the majority are using online, but we want to do more. Therefore, we will be offering digital appointments, in other words, a one-to-one session, probably in an arped office where they have confidential office facilities. We will be offering that to those who require or wish it. We will also be holding various briefing events in respect of other aspects, such as the land measurement and the process of transferring that measurement onto digital format, which is an extremely complicated process. There will be considerable effort as part of an improved customer service on helping more farmers and crofters to get online. I believe that that process will see a greater number using that this year. However, I did not think it right to make that compulsory, and we are not doing that. Therefore, those who choose to make paper applications will continue to be able to use that route. Could someone get a glass of water for the cabinet secretary, please? He is being reduced to stealing other people's. We will have Colin Smyth to be followed by Kate Forbes. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. It is difficult to follow that. Despite the cabinet secretary stating that the Scottish Government has quote, taken on board the many criticisms and comments that are levelled at the Scottish Government's IT system, it seems that the solution being proposed today is simply to pour more money into an existing IT system that has so far failed. Can the cabinet secretary tell us exactly how much more money will be spent on an IT system that has lost the trust of farmers and crofters who have been so badly let down? Fergus Ewing. In response to Colin Smyth's question, I would say that we have, in terms of the capital budget for the futures programme, completed that budget. Now we are in the process of annual maintenance remediation, which is part of the normal process of any IT system. In other words, there are always costs post completion of the original CAPEX budget for any IT system. We have been over this on the REC committee several times. The budget or the spend in total this year, which will include these matters and the online functions, is £10 million. I believe that that will be a very substantial and positive investment in assisting many more applicants to get their application online. That will have benefits, some benefits, I believe, for them and also for us, and I think that it will prove to be a good investment. Of course, it will be an investment for the period post 2019, whatever that future may hold. It is an asset for Scotland. The digitalised map showing the 55,000 landholdings in 4 million hectares of land is a great asset that can be used. The difficulty at the moment is that we have no idea what the UK Government proposed should be the support schemes following that, if indeed it is proposing such schemes. As the cabinet secretary said, elfast payments are vital to farmers and crofters in remote areas, and he has already touched on the short-term plans. What is the long-term future of targeted support for the most fragile rural areas? Fergus Ewing. As I have made clear, this Government believes very strongly that we must support our farmers to produce high-quality food and to be the custodians of our landscape in Scotland. That requires support. Those high standards of production must be maintained, the regulation must be maintained to access EU markets and it must be maintained for health and safety reasons. That is in short our aim. In particular, we are all concerned about hill farmers and in Cape Forb's constituency in places such as Clacabur, which will be the preponderance. We are particularly concerned that there should continue to be financial support for hill farmers. I have held two summits, one in Lanark and one in Dingwall, where I have met and listened very carefully to what they have to say. They are worried—it is not political, they are worried—because they do not really know what the future will hold. That is why I pressed Michael Gove at the short meeting that I had with him at the Royal Highland Show to provide as soon as possible confirmation that the UK Government will continue to accept that payments such as ELFAS play an essential part of the support system of farming and, indeed, the countryside in Scotland, as we know it. I echo my colleagues in welcoming any assistance that brings stability to the rural sector. However, it is also clear that today's statement is again an early admission of the challenges and the failures that the Scottish Government is facing for the third year in a row with its disastrous cap payment system. The question has been asked before, but could the cabinet secretary please inform Parliament on how much the additional improvements to the IT system will cost and when payments will accurately be paid and on time, removing the need for all this mitigation and loan systems? As I said in response to Colin Smyth's question, the budget for the procurement of the futures IT programme has been completed. As I have mentioned in a previous answer, the commitment is to spend £10 million this year. I will double check that on the record and come back to Mr Carson if I have oversimplified things, because quoting so many statistics sometimes it is possible to err, but I will double check that. That is my understanding, and that is a good investment that needs to be made. We are seeing considerable progress made in the operation of the IT. IT fixes have been made with more rapidity and the number of problems that have arisen in respect of the IT processes has substantially reduced. That is why I have expressed confidence in achieving the aims that we all want to see realised. In his answer to Jackie Baillie, the cabinet secretary referred to the Audit Scotland report on the very high figures that he had suggested for disallowance and penalties. Can he give any explanation as to why Audit Scotland came out with such so much higher figures than we have seen in practice? I think that that is a question that is best addressed to Audit Scotland. That concludes questions on the cabinet secretary's statement. I will give a couple of minutes to change seats and then we will move on to the next item of business.