 Fy hoi, wrth gwrs, wrth gwrs, ac rwy'n gweithio i gyd y 11 ffasyddion y Rhyw Llyfrgell i Gaeliol Cymru yn 2023. Fy hoi, gyda'r gweithiau gyda'r gwrsau eich cyffredinol gaeliwch i gyd i gaeliwch i gaeliwch i'r cyffredinol. Felly, byddwn i'n gwybod cymdeithas mewn Llyfrgell i Fyholl Fyhollol i Gaeliwch i Gaeliwch i Gaeliwch i Gaeliwch i Gaeliwch i'r cyffredinol a'r Minister for Public Health i Women's Health. I thank Jenny for her contributions to the committee over the past two years and wish her all the very best in her new role. Christine Grahame will join the committee, but, due to a previous constituency engagement, Christine is not able to be here this morning and has given her apologies for this morning's meeting, too. Agenda item 1 is the future agriculture policy. The main item of business today is pre-legislative scrutiny of Scotland's future agriculture policy, focusing on ecological resilience. I welcome to the meeting in person Ian Boyd Livingston, deputy director of soils and sustainability stock-free farming, and joining us remotely, Professor Tim Benton, director, environment and society programme, Chatham House, David Harley, chief officer, circular economy, Scottish Environment Protection Agency, Professor Pete Smith, chair in plant and soil science, the University of Aberdeen, and Morgan Vaughan, farm manager, RSPB Scotland. Welcome to all our witnesses. For those witnesses joining us remotely, please type R in the chat box if you would like to request to speak at any point. We have 90 minutes for questions and discussion. I shall start the questions with a general question to each panelist to give a short assessment of the current resilience of Scotland's environment and farming systems, drawing on your subject expertise. I ask Professor Benton to start, please. Thank you very much. This is a very broad question, and I think that we will tackle it in very different ways. I think as 2022 has shown us with the invasion of Ukraine coupled with recovery from Covid, coupled with various climate impacts, the global food system is somewhat irresilient in the sense that it is a very tight global market, and if events happen overseas, they drive up input prices, they drive all sorts of different changes. On top of that, of course, we have the precarious finances of particular upland farms in Scotland with the LFA, and we have the post-Brexit changes, all of those three things together, coupled with the likelihood in the future that shocks to the global food system and to the local food system driven by climate change interacting with geopolitics and geostrategic things, as happened in 2022, are going to increase in frequency. So as you look ahead, I think all around the world, and particularly in the UK, and particularly in upland areas, the business model for farming is going to be creaking. The ability to cope with fluctuations in global markets and foods means that food prices, and in the UK context, that's the main driver of food insecurity, food prices are likely to be increasing and more volatile as we look decades ahead. Also, from an environmental perspective, with environmental change, climate change already happening and increasing volatility in weather events, increasing volatility in the business environment, a whole lot of things can happen that are negative. There are some positives in this, but largely negative. So as you look ahead, I think the environment in the sense of drive to produce more yield, intensifying agriculture where it's possible is very real. The business environment is going to be very fluctuating. So the overall farming system, I think, is going to be, for many farmers, very tricky. The whole system as a whole is going to be increasingly lacking in resilience. Thank you, thank you, Tim. Can I bring in David Harley, please? Of course. From an environmental point of view, the water environment in Scotland is good. We have 80 per cent of our water environment is good or better status. However, the remaining 13 per cent, of that remaining 13 per cent diffuse pollution from agriculture is a very challenging and serious problem. We also have an issue with water scarcity. We found ourselves last year in a situation where we had to withdraw the ability to abstract from irrigators in the east of Scotland. That was the first time we had to do that because of the severe conditions in the Eden catchment in particular. So that's only going to become more exacerbated with climate change. In terms of climate change emissions and carbon emissions, greenhouse gases, agriculture accounts for just under 20 per cent of Scotland's emissions. On current projections, we are not going to meet our national targets for climate change unless we make a step change on those greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, we have a related biodiversity crisis with agriculture having an impact on that. So a step change is needed at this point. There is an urgency about that at this point. Thank you. Professor Pete Smith will then move to Morgan Vaughan and then Ian after that. Thank you. The responses from Tim and David were very good. I don't have very much to add, except to say that building upon the point about the biodiversity crisis and the climate that drives the net zero, agriculture is not on track to reduce emissions and to meet net zero, so we have to make a step change, as was pointed out earlier. So some of those changes that we'll need to make to the land system and to the agricultural and food system could confer greater resilience on the system. If we get it right, if we implement the right mix of land use and the right incentives to incentivise that land use, we could improve the resilience of the food system. The future shocks as Tim outlined, the future shocks in the global food system, but also future shocks to climate change. By using more regenerative or ecological approaches to agriculture, if we can incentivise those, it can improve the resilience of the whole farm system and the agricultural production system of future shocks. I think that we have an opportunity here to move forward in a way that benefits both the agricultural sector, the food system and the environment by improving the resilience of the system, making sure that we build that in for anything that we try to incentivise. Thank you. Morgan Vaughan, please. Thank you very much for the invite today. I think that I'd like to echo quite a few of Professor Smith's points there. My area of expertise is really west coast livestock farming, and I think that in terms of resilience, we've got a very good opportunity here to build that in, especially when you think about marginal upland areas that will benefit not only the food system, but also wildlife and the environment as the opportunity to do things there, which I think is a really unique time and unique opportunity to be able to capitalise on that. I think that looking at in terms of those sorts of systems, low inputs and further reducing those where possible is a really exciting opportunity and can deliver in terms of biodiversity in quite a big way. Yes, I think that there's lots of opportunity to reframe this and look at particularly west-pace farming. The opportunity is big in order to be able to build a more resilient system going forward and that does obviously need to change to do that. Thank you, and Ian Boyd Livingston, please. Morning, thank you. Looking at the broader context, I'm sure we've all seen the IPCC or some of us have seen the IPCC report that's just out, the Synthesis Report which says that the average global temperature now is 1.1 degrees centigrade above pre-industrial average. But the secondary figure actually shows us that the average global temperature over land is 1.6 degrees above pre-industrial average. So from that perspective, the Paris Agreement is already gone and I found that actually quite terrifying when you see that figure. So I think that that should hopefully make us all sit up and take notes. Now to put that in the context of what we do at Stock Free Farming, we support farmers who wish to switch away from livestock farming to farming in a way that is more climate positive, more for biodiversity and more for people. And we know there are farmers who want to do that in Scotland right now. And that could make a very quick difference to our attempt to reach net zero by 2032. Frankly, I think that net zero by 2032 is too little, too late which is a difficult thing to say but the science is pointing out that we're going to go way beyond 2 degrees centigrade on current track. So I would echo the comments of some of my colleagues on the panel but in terms of what we do next with most of the farming in Scotland being livestock we need to reduce that livestock farming. I think that's vital and important which puts just transition front and centre because we have a duty to support those farmers who are currently livestock farming but want to switch away doing something else. That's the point I really wanted to get across. So I think in terms of ecological resilience I don't think our ecology is resilient. It's that simple. The question isn't meant to sound provocative because I understand the need to tackle a climate emergency but I'm curious to know Mr Boyd Livingston if you've ever actually sat down with a common Grazing Committee in the Crofting Counties and used the word stock free or the phrase stock free I'm just struggling to visualise representation of the industry and the industry and the industry and I'm just struggling to visualise representing an area like that what stock free agriculture would look like other than agriculture free agriculture so I just wonder if you recognise that the ecosystem resilience that already exists within low intensity farming which includes stock Well it's better to have no stock, a lot of the research and all the things I talk about today I think they are backed by peer reviewed independent research I know you hear a lot of research one of the things I think is important is to not take my word for things but also when you're talking to people and they mention research and science is to see where that comes from and I can send you obviously lists after the meeting of the things that I'm referring to but independent peer reviewed research is the gold standard so let's look at those sorts of things I completely understand if you go to a common Grazing Committee of course it's a horrific thing to contemplate without the support which is why just transition is so important oh to non livestock farming but also even if we look at where most of the livestock farming is in Scotland this issue with LFA for example with my background both in permaculture and the soil food web which is the method that Dr Leiningam pioneered people are growing foods all over the world in places where they were told they cannot grow food and I think we need to focus on growing food for people and the farmers we depend on now we will depend on far more in the future we know the farmers who want to switch away from livestock exist we conducted a survey and 36% of the farmers we interviewed farmers and crofters in our qualitative survey said they would switch out of livestock farming today if there was support from the government if there was no support the existing system does not support that and the new agriculture bill does not support it either because for example the payments regions 2 and 3 the restrictions will continue that if you don't have a certain livestock density then you have to go through a lot of surveys and various other things in order to get any support at all so it's it's a provocative click but I understand it we've got a transitional period in which we can make sorry no not at all I wasn't trying to catch you I was just trying to catch the convener's eye but finish your point it's the quickest way to make the most significant change the livestock farming cannot be net zero and there are many reports out there much research shows that there was a very recent report from the centre for innovation and excellence in livestock report was released in 2020 saying that the current technology much the same was with carbon capture and storage the technology hasn't been invented yet to help so we're relying on things that are not yet in could not be used my two other points really were firstly I just wondered if you accept the arguments that are put by people like the RSPB that in many areas of Scotland biodiversity in terms of wildlife depends on their being a grazed environment and it's difficult to see how that happens for certain species if there is no grazed environment but I suppose my other point really related to that is what it is you're advocating that these people should grow and more to the point how you're going to encourage behavioural change which does not involve all the people who currently meet in this country whether that's right or wrong simply getting it from Argentina or whatever we're talking about helping the farmers who want to switch that's my we're not here to force people to do anything but given that there are farmers who want to switch so 36% of our interviewee said they would switch right now now if you use the figure of how many farmers and crofters there are in Scotland which the NFUS produced so 17,500 that means there are potentially more than 6,000 farmers today farmers and crofters who would leave livestock farming behind which is a huge benefit to climate change, our goals biodiversity benefits when there is no grazing it benefits a bit when there's low intensity versus high intensity grazing but if you look for example at some traditional Scottish traditional Scottish nature for example, montane scrub in the Scottish Government's climate change plan update there's a section which talks about scrub as if it's something to be avoided but montane scrub which is the band that separates the forests from the Rocky mountain tops is a vital habitat it's hugely important for biodiversity it's almost all gone because it is grazed and it won't come back unless the grazing stops and there are lots of different examples of that so we would say the farmers who want to switch let's help them do that because that's going to be a huge win for biodiversity a huge win for our climate goals and we can help them to either grow food many of the LFA's you will be able to grow food if you drive around Scotland now you can see crops being grown to feed animals for example I think more than half of the feed animals we should be growing crops to feed people in the LFA's where food cannot be grown it could be rewilded tree planting if we're talking about carbon sequestration carbon sequestration the latest science is not what we thought it is carbon is a cycle carbon that goes into the ground comes out again some of it very quickly the best way to lock up carbon is in the fibre of trees that cannot grow crops tree planting is an obvious and a very secure way that doesn't work in an area that's peat peat bogs again peat restoration peat is of course is a fantastic environment in which to lock up carbon for longer but soil carbon there are essentially two types of soil carbon one is called particulate organic matter again this is recent research it's the largest stuff which comes out again through erosion, through grazing all these other things the other type is called mineral associated organic matter which is more to microbial that is locked up for much longer but it plateaus and I've heard recently that Rothamsted Institute who've been looking at this since 1850 I believe the carbon in the test fields they have is plateauing so there is a limit to how much could be stored in that area can I bring in Morgan Vaughan and then her supplementary from it's just specifically on the survey that you did how many people did you survey 51 people had the full quality of surveyed and so I actually door to door and talking to them what was the lowest and the highest acreage I'm afraid I don't know I'll send you that I'm a recent arrival at Stockfree Farming so I will get that data and send it to you Thank you Can I bring in Morgan Vaughan and then we'll have a supplementary from Jim Fairlie Thank you very much I think it's important to note that RSPB Scotland has been a staunch advocate for livestock farming particularly on the west coast for the last 30 years plus and when we're talking about resilience I think it's very key at all in terms of biodiversity and food production The farm I manage for example we have a very low input system 40 breeding cows which are here to complement the landscape but then also produce food at the end of the day so I think that is key particularly on the west coast for biodiversity where here for example we're managing for red-billed chaff and corn-crake and without those livestock here it's unlikely that those birds are really on a knife edge in Scotland so in terms of biodiversity and important species they are very critical to the ecosystem so without the ability to use livestock as tools on a conservation level we'd be looking at severe losses in terms of biodiversity on the west coast and I think even thinking of the broader picture community on the west coast is in so many cases based around cattle and sheep farming and I think it's really important to be looking forward at how to support that in a way which can be resilient and sustainable reducing inputs is obviously key and things are going to have to change going forward to meet targets but I think looking carefully at how we can do that it's all possible to deliver both resilience in terms of food and the biodiversity and context thank you I think I've got far too many broad questions to go into this so I may come back to it but can I just ask you how do you Scotland's 85 per cent LFA 15 per cent of our land is non-LFA we can't grow the crops in this country without livestock livestock are a major part of livestock production in the system are you advocating that we stop eating meat so that's my first question I'm advocating we help the farmers who want to stop farming livestock that's what there's lots of our survey your survey was for 51 people I've been in farming most of my adult life I've never met a farmer yet who would want to give up livestock on the basis of the environment they might give up livestock because they can't make money out of it but that's usually a forced choice rather than a cultural choice I simply cannot see how a pastoral country like Scotland with the kind of topography that we've got is going to be able to ever be livestock free given what we hear from the RSPB in terms of creating biodiversity and the livestock's ability to help us maintain the kind of areas and I've seen it I've actually done it myself I simply do not see how livestock free farming especially at 2,000 or 2,500 feet is ever going to be anything other than non viable the LFA system I would challenge that soil is unique every soil is unique you have to understand the soil in every field it's a very labour intensive process but the LFA designation is not something we should just sit around and go we should be out there looking at these things and that's what we intend to do is actually to go to some of the farmers we've been to and say like let's help you let's begin by seeing what else we can do with the soil that you've got some areas we cannot grow food I totally agree in which case we'll get rewilding planting trees OK, can I ask you then if you're going to rewild and plant trees in these areas how many tenant farmers have you spoken to about that system where you're going to change it over to rewilded so that the landowner might get something what about the tenant farmers because there's many many tenant farmers largely in LFA areas again forgive me I don't know how many tenant farmers were into you as part of this but 36% were all they all said they would switch today to more climate positive farming which could include tree planting rewilding or growing crops for people which are the three areas that we focus on so I can accept the fact that we can do tree planting but still have livestock as part of that equation I simply do not see how you take livestock out of the natural cycle of what nature would do Well livestock farming is not part of nature's cycle though it doesn't happen in nature OK, let me ask another question if we take all the livestock off of these areas what are you going to do with the deer and the herds Again, my point is that we want to support the farmers so we want to do it now and if you extrapolate that 36% and then add the 28% who said well we might then you're talking about possibly more than 11,000 farmers But you've taken up a sample of about 57 people 51 That's right, so I say it's a quality to survey so these things you do with fewer numbers I'm just extrapolating from what we found we'll go out and find more but we need to support these farmers I suppose is what I really want to get across Given the diversity of Scotland's topography going from coastline to the top of the hills that 51 farmers are they representative of everyone across the entire topography across all the farming in Scotland the survey went from the boarders right up to Sutherland and Mearn Alice If supplementary on that I realise none of us want to live in a country that's all far and we realise the benefit of wild places I don't want to get hung up on words here but have you considered just how badly the word rewilding goes down in marginal communities marginally viable fragile rural communities Yes, unfortunately we're stuck with this jargon aren't we, rewilding can mean so many things We wouldn't use it if I was you Let's not put bears things back into the woods and this sort of thing It's bringing back biodiversity and nature Again, using the montane scrub as an example, it's a vital habitat that is lost because of grazing There are other examples, many other examples So I think I would focus on the tree planting actually rather more on the rewilding I've fallen into the trap of using an ecologically fashionable term but bringing back nature and nature does better when there is no grazing than where it's grazing I'm just offering you some advice that if you do go and visit these communities That's my word Okay, thank you Yes, good advice Can I just ask the panel are there any win-wins for the ecosystem and business resilience and what policy leavers would need to be available to maximise those win-wins Can I go to Morgan? Yeah, thank you very much I think it's again it's looking at this as a whole from RTB Scotland's point of view it's looking particularly at the mechanisms for payment it's less I think about looking at direct payments where large landowners can take advantage of that and more about supporting high value for nature farming and I think in a lot of places again I'm going to keep bang on about the west coast there's a lot of high value for nature farming which is delivered on small scales that can be very quickly added together and if that's encouraged that's where we'd have big wins in terms of resilience food systems and biodiversity so I think it's that kind of broader picture thing that we need to look at to get the best of both worlds I think then you can be looking at a system that's resilient in terms of food production and extremely resilient in terms of biodiversity which is what we're all here talking about really in terms of the climate crisis we're currently facing so I think it's that kind of level it's addressing where the money is going and the outputs which we get from it, I think they need to be a lot more measurable a lot more defined and have a clear purpose Anybody else on the panel want to respond to that question David Harvie I'm really happy to respond to that our work with farmers has been focused in areas of Scotland where we've got severe diffuse pollution in the south west which is, yes, mostly dairy and in the east which is I can't be a mixture but they can't largely arable what we found in those catchments what we find is that those catchments are significantly degraded and what you get is a cascade of challenges associated with soil loss, soil erosion nutrient and pesticide runoff associated flashiness in terms of flooding biodiversity problems and fisheries so in terms of rebuilding those systems there's significant wind winds and I'd really like to emphasise that these are wind winds not just for the environment and for wider public goods but for actually agriculture itself in terms of that wider resilience and I'd like to give just three examples of wind winds where they lie one is in terms of soil management we know that better soil management can reduce greenhouse gas emissions will reduce pollution and essentially will keep soil on the land losing soil if soil is a finite resource losing soil is a great significance to the future of agriculture another area is the management of fertiliser and slurries again done in the right way will make a significant will really help with the greenhouse gas issue will decrease pollution and again will save money these are resources these are valuable resources and increasingly more expensive and the last one I'd just like to emphasise is space space for rivers zones and buffers rivers potentially with trees can again mitigate against climate change can help with climate change adaptation in terms of keeping making sure we don't get erosion from floods increasing again increasing biodiversity fisheries and helping with flooding and again securing agriculture into the future so I think it's really helpful to explore these wind wind areas David, could I move to Pete and then to agriculture is one of the few industries that we support one of the few industries that we provide public money to support so we have a great a great chance to influence what we want from agriculture and what we want from our food system we currently the former form of payment under the common agricultural policy was paying paying farmers with a single farm payment and it wasn't very targeted but we have the opportunity to do with the agriculture agriculture bill and the other agricultural reforms that have been planned is to use those tiered funding tier one, two and three funding to better target that funding towards farmers that are delivering outcomes that deliver public goods private goods are the food products that they raise that they sell in the private markets which they are recompensable but they also provide we should all recognise that they provide vital public goods for example carbon sequestration good water quality, air quality biodiversity habitats we should be rewarding farmers for providing those public goods too and if they can demonstrate the outcomes in terms of the public goods then that's where we should target the funding we have the opportunity to do that because of the unique position that we're in designing how we support agriculture and we mustn't miss this opportunity we really must make sure that we're providing funding to support the farmers so that we can help them with a just transition so that they can still produce food but we're subsidising them we're providing funding to provide those public goods public money for public goods thank you and Tim? Thanks very much building on what people have said beforehand I think the literature is increasingly clear that the market does not reward farmers for farming in a way that is environmentally friendly and sustainable and the notion that public money is a means of correcting that market failure is a very strong one farmers there is also a new literature that's coming on stream that shows that farmers actually make the most profit if they reduce their external inputs to a minimum even though that reduces their cash flow so you're in a situation that actually farming in an unsustainable way is rewarded by the market farming in a sustainable way is often not rewarded by the market and if you are going to farm in a sustainable way that requires a reduction in yields which may improve your overall profitability but it doesn't improve your cash flow the notion that if we want to maximise public goods we should be farming in a diversity, pollution climate, soils friendly way I think is really key but of course the downside of that is that yields in typical farming systems will be reduced and so there is a clear question here that I'm posing to you as to what is the system boundary of this discussion are we talking about farming and ecosystem services or are we talking about food and diets and food security because if Scotland produces less produce and as one of the previous question says imports stuff that is produced with greater externalities from abroad you might gain locally but globally you might make the system worse so where in all of the thinking is the public good of what is a healthy diet for people in Scotland and where that comes from because you could broaden the public goods notion beyond carbon storage and biodiversity you could broaden the public goods notion to include public health and get a reward for growing things that are nutritionally better for people and poor diets in Scotland Scotland is notorious for poor diets and rates of obesity and all the rest of it that comes from things in the right amounts so there is a question about where does public goods in the public health system fit into this as the output of UK and particularly Scotland's farms over Before I bring in Ian I'll bring in Jim Fairlie First mate I've got a very quick sup on that you'd said that the market never doesn't reward the kind of farming that is inevitably reduced output but it's on the other side of that not that we demand a required food that is affordable to the people who are going to buy it how do we square that up thank you it's a good question the answer to that is we have spent 60 years designing a system that is predicated on more and more supply of calories and not a supply of nutrition and as somebody mentioned earlier at the moment 7% of grain produced in Scotland is consumed by humans the rest goes into alcohol and goes into livestock feed across Europe 60% of grain goes into livestock feed that is not a market demand that is exogenous that is created by the innovation in the farming system to make food cheaper because it's now economically rational to grow grain and feed it to livestock whereas 30 years ago it wasn't so the demand for animal source food is a consequence of innovation in the system if we were to feed everybody in a sustainable and nutritious way we would be growing very different things in very different ways and I would suggest that what we have is a large scale market failure in the sense that the market provides diets which particularly for economically marginalised are radically unhealthy it provides those diets in ways that come with significant externalities to the environment and it doesn't create public goods in the way that we need them and were we to design a market to provide healthy and sustainable diets we would put the incentives in different places and we would create different sorts of policy envelopes, we would have different sorts of trade agreements we would do things very very differently but it is not the case I would say very strongly it is not the case that people demand it is the case that the market has created demand for goods that are unhealthy for people and unhealthy for the planet over very quickly follow up I would agree with you in particular the sheer power of supermarkets actually drives what people eat but we also have a cultural demand in this country for cheap food it has to be one of my bug bears for a lot of years stack at high sell at low so how if we do this too quickly if we do what we are talking about here too quickly how do you get the people who are buying the food on board with that change of culture because that is effectively what we are talking about we are trying to change our culture here we are trying to do that with the goods food nation bill we are trying to do things on a gradual basis if we do that too quickly how do you get the public to buy into it that's a very good question and you won't and I think we have had a journey of effectively the last 60 years of driving down food prices and making food cheaper and more available and driving up consumption to answer your question directly there are ways that you can increase the price of the better food no decrease the price of the better food increase its availability increase the price of the worst food and decrease its availability put pressure downwards on waste so that even though some foods are becoming more expensive the household food bill doesn't necessarily go up because you are changing the definition of the diet and reducing waste so its not immediately clear that the sorts of things that we are talking about in this committee today would drive up all food prices and household food bills it might make things more expensive in some areas and less expensive in other areas but I do think the primary point is that this has got to be a journey over years because as we have made food increasingly cheap since the 50s and 60s we have its been an economic driver to encourage consumption the less you spend on food the more you can spend on other things and the more you can drive economic growth and the consequence is that the household spending on food has declined radically over the last decades but the ability for households to rapidly switch is practically as we are finding with this cost of living crisis because that spending that we used to do historically is now spent on long-term contracts of services household mortgages or car loans or Netflix or other things so there isn't the ability for people suddenly to face a doubling in food prices as we can see this year and last year so it has to be a journey over time but it has to be a deliberately strategically led journey to signal that as has happened over the last 60 years looking backwards as we look ahead diets will change our food system is shockingly bad from a health perspective we need to change diets from a health perspective let's drive diets in the right direction make them things that we can produce with pride at home that are sustainably produced that contribute to the wider public goods and get the system to work and get the market to work at producing the goods that people need I would say in terms of quick wins let's support the farmers who want to stop farming livestock and farm a different kind of farming because livestock is the worst in terms of climate being climate negative and if I leave the room today with one thing less than your mind it would be let's support the farmers who want to do that, that's my main point but in terms of the more general part of the bill focus on actions rather than outcomes we're talking about nature there's a lot of talk about outcomes and measured outcomes but it's quite difficult because nature is a complex system so when you tweak one thing you don't necessarily get the result you think you will the more actions we take the more good results we'll get but rewarding farmers for doing the right thing will be incredibly important some of the outcomes can take years if not decades but doing the right thing can be very quick the systems that we see now you can begin seeing results in a single growing season and frankly we're at the stage now where we need more action than talking but continuing the subject of talking just putting the language of the agriculture bill proposals into action would be fantastic and when you see the phrase to farm and croft with nature I've seen agriculture proposals and bills in different countries and that phrase just leaps out from the Scottish agriculture proposals to do that and when you see things like to keep farmers in farming we're going to need far more farmers and the farmers who are there now we will depend on them even more so farmers who do not want to farm livestock whether it's because of the trauma they experience we're finding out a lot of them about moral harm that's being done to farmers who have to send livestock to slaughter if they stop farming that's a huge loss to Scotland and bringing more farmers in so keeping farmers in farming and that's just the other thing as it says in the Scottish Government documentation Scotland is committed to ending our contribution to climate change which is a huge statement because as long as we're pumping CO2 and equivalents into the air we are contributing so we may not be able to get to absolute zero but we can get very very close so again these are very quick wins we've got to move on OK Ian you're saying that livestock are the the worst thing that we can possibly do in agriculture what do you say to the example of Macedonia where they got rid of their livestock completely so that was the James Hunt Institute report wasn't it and if you look at their report that's not quite what they were saying again I'll have to send you the results but it's not quite as straightforward to put before this committee as with all these things it's nuanced it wasn't the case that just simply removing the livestock I meant they couldn't grow anything but I looked to that report in detail so I'll submit that to you in writing if that's OK Thank you can we move on to questions from Rachel Hamilton now Thank you could I ask David Harley a number of questions please and I was wondering how much is CEPA investing in nature-based solutions to flood risk management in terms of financially what is the current water storage capacity Scotland has and how much it needs by 2050 to allow sufficient water abstraction to protect food security in Scotland OK I can have a go at that in terms of investment into natural nature-based solutions for flooding so we're not the flood authority we advise, we're a strategic planning advisor on flooding so we work with local authorities on the flood risk management planning process so we don't actually contribute that investment but we do work with local authorities to have strategic flood risk management plans so we don't have that information I can see if I can get something for you afterwards David David, shall I put some context to why I'm asking these questions to make it slightly I suppose fairer but last year in Fife and in the Borders the abstraction licences were suspended which had a direct impact on the broccoli growing, soft fruit growing and farmers were up in arms about it now one of the actions that SIPA are taking is to ensure that there is more riparian tree planting that there is more soil stability on the river banks and that is in your own report so it is a bit confusing when you say that you're not authority but you allow others to work and spend that money my point is I think on Roger Croft from Nature Scots point that instead of SIPA putting concrete down spending a billion on flood risk management that we should be working with farmers and using a catchment management approach to ensure that farmers can get the benefits communities can get the benefits and we can ensure that the river flow helps farmers as well as communities rather than spending all that energy on concrete and using contractors that don't necessarily benefit local communities we're talking about two linked areas we're talking about flood risk management and water scarcity management both of which are linked in terms of are different in ways as well so in terms of flood risk management absolutely SIPA doesn't promote the on-going use of concrete for flood prevention going on and it won't actually work in terms of climate change going forward you can't build more walls to deal with climate change flood risk increases going forward so our role there is to work with local authorities in terms of those wider in terms of mitigation across catchments in terms of flood risk management and that includes a degree of agricultural consideration in terms of water scarcity I agree yes we were in a very difficult situation last summer luckily we didn't have impacts on growers we were days away from that but we didn't have impacts on growers but that's a very real risk going forward and we're working with the sector and with Scottish Government on approaches to deal with water scarcity and how we might respond to situations going forward the new water and sewerage bill is also going to look at this and see if we need more powers to consider water scarcity management going forward but absolutely it is a holistic we're talking about full catchments here and there's a holistic approach needed and as I said before some of the approaches I mentioned earlier that can deal with other environmental issues can also help with water scarcity in terms of animal flooding in terms of riparian zones in terms of soil management drainage management so I think it's very much a holistic approach does that help? Yeah it does help I think the point I'm trying to make is that with the future agricultural bill it is the connectivity between very many stakeholders not just farmers so far I feel as though we've heard a lot about removing livestock I mean I could have a debate pretty much for most of the day of the benefits of livestock and the benefits to biodiversity to soil stability to habit restoration but this is about every single person and all stakeholders having an interest in ensuring that we have good food security and all the rest of it and improving the ability for farmers to do their jobs well so I think that in the future we need to maybe bring these elements together rather than look at them in isolation and one of those things is that we heard on the slurry storage that there needs to be more investment into that specifically and that farmers who have been in front of this committee have actually said that they are doing things and they are putting their hands in their pockets to make improvements in animal health in animal productivity and efficiency but the government actually are not giving them enough support to measure or meet the targets that the expectation of the government so I don't know if anyone else wants to come in on that Have you got other questions? I know that Morgan was nodding in agreement at some of those points I wondered if he wanted to come in Thank you Rachel, yes indeed I think a lot of those points you are making are really to sum up a lot of what we need to be looking at just now particularly in terms of livestock and soil health particularly for me they go hand in hand and particularly again in a system like mine the livestock are all part of that soil health so for example managing our in-by-fields here we managed them at this time specifically for Corncrate but a whole range of farmland birds benefit from that management and then come September in some areas we take a grass cut then and then we are after a month grazing with our cattle so that's returning goodness in a natural regenerative way to the soils here so I think that side of it is key going forward it's matching up those things so we hear a lot about soil health now but it's the actual practical side of it and supporting that again it's almost a behavioural kind of thing that we need to be supporting in order to get the best for particularly soil health and fertility going forward and again by diversity which comes from that it's just enormous so very much that's why I'm nodding very vigorously to your points there Can I ask one more question please just a quick one Morgan in your role as a farm manager supporting the RSPB do you agree that there should that direct payments should remain I think direct payments in the right places potentially should remain RSPB Scotland is a huge beneficiary of direct payments at the moment for some of our holdings so it's about targeting them in areas where we need to look at where they're going and again it's like Mr Boy Livingston said it's the actions that go with them as well as the outcome about marrying those things up so money needs to be getting to places where particularly again some livestock enterprises operate on kind of knife edge sort of budgets to sustain their outputs and supporting people like that where the livestock are what's delivering the biodiversity and ultimately food production is what we would like to see at the RSPB Scotland definitely so I think direct payments in the right places are what we should be looking at thank you I think David wants to come in and then Tim thanks convener it was just that point that was made there about the complexity and the multiple stakeholders we're talking about complex systems here and if we are to get the win-wins that we aspire to achieve then it does require a landscape approach or a catchment approach just building on the last comments that is tailored investment and support but also what's also critical is advice and facilitation because there's a there are complexities here we found with our work with farmers working on diffuse pollution that we've visited 6,000 farms over the last 13 years with very very little complaint and we've achieved significant compliance with diffuse pollution regulations and the main reason for that is that we had an expert we invested time in that work we had experts who understood farming but also that we provided that advice in a way where farmers could see the advantage of those actions of those required actions to their business and they could see where the savings were so I guess I'm really pushing for that landscape or catchment focused approach but supported by good advice I think we have to invest in that advice and facilitate a co-operation between farmers at a landscape scale Thanks David Tim and then Pete please Thanks just two quick points I think the literature around agricultural subsidies are that direct payments are not particularly efficient in providing the public goods outcomes hence the move towards public money for public goods mantra but I really wanted to comment a little bit about this systemic nature of the challenge and again I would say you have lots of moving parts in this discussion you've clearly got farm business you've clearly got the rural environment but you've also got food production and the markets into which that food production go and the last questioner talked about food security and I would say there is an open question about the degree to which Scottish production is linked to Scottish food security and how that price transmission across the market might work and so on but I think you need to put all of the parts together to think about what is Scottish production for is it really to give a livelihood to farmers is it to boost the Scottish economy or is it to provide food security and of those three the last one is probably the weakest link at the moment but in the long term it might need to be a stronger link and so you can't divorce this conversation from the issue of agriculture is about producing food if that is part of the broader landscape in which you are having to think through the trade-offs because there are trade-offs between farming and environment as we have been talking about but there are also trade-offs between farming environment and food production and who eats the food and who benefits from that food production over the issue of direct payments as Tim said it is not a great way to incentivise public goods but you have the opportunity in the proposed system with the tiered payment system where tier one is what everybody gets and tier two or three are more conditional upon the derivatives that are undertaken by farmers or collections of farmers that deliver public goods so that could either be measured at the outcome level or as we know the outcomes take a long time to measure but there are some activities some actions that we know will deliver good outcomes so we could incentivise those payments at tier two and tier three to get the balance between how much you pay in that basic payment and how much you allow farmers to opt into tier two and tier three with plans to improve their farm management to deliver public goods so I think that's the key you have the mechanism there with which to do this and it's just getting the details right to allow that system to deliver the public goods the other thing I would say which was David's point about landscape scale management a lot of the benefits that we're going to get through improving our agricultural system are not going to be made at the individual farm they're going to be made at the landscape or catchment scale so the regional land use partnerships are going to play a vital role in that so we have to adequately finance those to allow farmers to collectivise and to get together to make plans at the regional catchment scale so that we can get a good co-ordinated change transition that allows a just transition for the farmers and also delivers the public goods I think Ian wants to come in and then we'll move on to questions from Arianne yes just briefly the direct payments I think are going to be essential and of course to stop refining what we would say we want to see the appeal of the restrictions on payment regions tier three for farmers who do not want to have livestock can obtain government support in those areas I think that's what I was going to say Arianne thanks convener I've got a number of questions under question three and then shall I go into question four as well David this is to you and you may not be able to respond to this but it's triggered by work that CEP has been doing so I'm aware of the sector plan for livestock production and I'd be interested to know if livestock production is more at risk from climate change than other farming sectors due to heat stress in animals and a shortage of forage and if that is the case how can the sector adapt to climate impacts while minimising its contribution to climate change I'll struggle to answer that ok so maybe somebody else can come in on that maybe no one else was paying attention because I said it was for David ok so what I'm asking is that I'm aware that I'm wondering if livestock production will be more at risk from climate change than other farming sectors due to heat stress in animals and a shortage of forage and if that is the case how could the sector adapt to climate impacts while minimising its contribution to climate change to geeky for people ok brilliant ok great so Morgan and then Tim I think in terms of practically answering your question here even on our and say we've had issues the last few years with summer drought which has caused issues in terms of raising livestock I think the key thing again to know looking at the agriculture bill is an emphasis on breeds as well so native breeds tend to be in a very general sense of the word more resilient to these kind of events so it's about having the right breeds of livestock in the right places to do the job of food production and also for increasing biodiversity and reducing inputs to RSPB Scotland doing a lot of work at the moment to look at art and the prize in terms of actually physically the animals so reducing sizes of cattle so we're looking at more native breeds and my colleagues and I are looking at native angus cattle switching to those which benefit everything in terms of if you do have issues relating to climate change in terms of what feed these animals need so a more grass fed system and obviously resilience and that is tricky and again it would depend from farmer to farmer depending on their ground we're quite fortunate here where we have a mixture of junior grass and hillground which is always going to provide some level of input for our animals but I think native breeds are going to be a big part of reducing emissions in the livestock system and in terms of nature restoration they use the landscape potentially differently compared to generalised commercial breed so there is some mileage in that as well. Great, thanks for that, Tim. I'm aware of time. I think the issue of forage is really key. I live in the Yorkshire Bales and my hill farming neighbours have suffered recently because of the drought issue and lack of forage. They have however been able to buy it in. Heat stress is a reality for farmed livestock but I think the real question here is Scottish livestock under threat because of competition with large scale industrial systems where animals are kept in sheds and increasingly in a condition sheds in parts of the world that the lower yielding breeds that are native that can cope with low forage, grass fed etc will end up at a competitive disadvantage so the risk from climate change to the livestock sector in Scotland might be more of an economic one, let alone the the citizen pushback against eating meat that is prevalent in some parts of the community but rather than a direct one that comes from climate change in Scotland itself. Over. Thanks, Ian. Yes. Apart from the heat stress issue of novel diseases so quite apart from the immorality of treating sentient beings as commodities their lives have become more miserable because new diseases that will have to be fought will arrive and there's no way to do that at the moment again. It will rely on new technology and it doesn't exist. Thanks very much for that. All these issues are really important for us to be aware of. I'm going to move on so the next question comes under the area around ecosystem pressure points and I think we've started to touch in on that already so but it's also specifically related to the agricultural bill and I hear the points made about we need to be pointing towards actions rather than being focused on outcomes but we do have this bill and I know it's a framework bill which is quite challenging in some way so I'm going to direct my question to initially Pete and then Tim and I'd be interested to hear really clearly what should the agricultural bills specify on the face of the bill to ensure that policies and financial support are put in place for the sector to adapt to climate and environmental change in the most ecological and sustainable way so I know we've talked about agroecology, retrenw to practice but what do we need on the face of the bill to make sure that anything that comes in subordinate legislation in the future or any powers given or payments, the tier one two and three payments etc what do we need on that bill to really make sure that we're moving our farming production in the right direction so that it again so addresses Tim you were talking about the fact that we've got this weak link around food security which is very concerning so maybe a bit of a big question but can I start with Pete and then go to Tim yeah well it has to include both the nature crisis has to acknowledge both the nature crisis and the climate change crisis I think those are the two critical twin crises that we face so I think it has to say something about nature friendly farming and it has to say something about climate resilient or climate smart farming which includes both mitigation reducing emissions and creating sinks and adaptation improving resilience to future climate change so something along the lines of climate smart or nature smart or climate and nature smart I don't know the exact wording but something along those lines I think would be important to communicate that this is moving beyond just food production food production is important of course because that is agriculture as primary public primary private good but we are also interested in the public goods and the vital the vital component the agriculture and the land use play in meeting both of those targets we can't do it without the land sector we can't do it with our agriculture and forestry thanks and Tim we could spend a whole day in debate on this particular question so again without trying to be difficult I would say the answer to this question in part depends on Scotland's view of whether the food production is important from a food perspective or whether it is the private goods that maintain the livelihoods of the farmers because basically there are two contrasting visions for what a sustainable food system look like which are antithetical to each other one is you put a fence around nature and you use the land that's available in a very intensive way whether or not it's sustainable intensification or just intensive the other is that you somehow accept that you reduce your productivity and you farm in a more agroecological way which is more nature friendly more biodiversity friendly better for soils better for carbon etc etc but the challenge to the latter view which I think in the round is the right one is that of course the farming systems like that tend to produce less food so the real challenge from a strategic perspective for Scottish Government is to think through that question of whether the food production is important for a public good and food security is a public good even though the private goods enter the market as Peter has noted so in a sense the answer to your question depends on whether or not you pay public money for public goods and the public goods include the food security that might arise and in which case how do you then link up Scottish food security as opposed to Scottish production to Scottish economic growth and the free market of food and the imports that you get from the rest of the UK common market and from overseas did that make sense thanks for that response I so you've actually kind of like so I'm going to move on to question 4 around the resilience piece right is that appropriate can I bring in her question and then move on because it leads on to my question kind of leads on to what he's just saying sorry to muddle things up okay so Tim I'm going to stick with you because you just said we could talk about this for the day so again you may have touched on things but just good to hear and this kind of continuing along the kind of food security bits so the papers for today make clear how ecosystems resilience affects the resilience of farm businesses and food security which you've kind of been talking about our nation's ability to continue producing food and feeding our citizens as it depends on producing food within planetary boundaries and I think you've described that in the two different ways right the intensive or the reduced so what do we need to see in our agriculture and land use policy including the agricultural bill keep coming back to that bill because I really want us to get that right and the criteria for support through the future payment framework to ensure that long term food security Tim what do we need to see in the payment systems every time you ask a question I think about the kind of system boundaries to that question so the UK position UK government position has been for a very long time that food security is a function of the market the events of 2022 plus some work that Pete and I did many years ago around food price spikes the events of 2022 put a different plus Brexit put a different spin on that and raised the issue of food security is a real part of national security given that the bulk of the food that is eaten in Scotland is not produced in Scotland there is a question about what is the best way of achieving food security in Scotland is it by increasing self-sufficiency in which case you should be growing different things in different ways and different amounts or is it about ensuring the trade relationships with the rest of the UK and internationally however you splice and dice that question you could imagine a food secure Scotland based on trade that has a very soft farming system which preserves the environment in a real way and farmers produce relatively less but a premium quality products that go into niche markets that make a profit and the system is not built around productivity and driving food production for the notion that we are feeding ourselves because you are not feeding yourselves the UK is not feeding ourselves but in future that might become more important as the geopolitics, geopolitical tension ramps up over the next decades or to post Ukraine so it is this is why I keep on coming back to the question the future of your agricultural strategy with respect to the environment crucially depends on the degree to which you think food production as a national security issue is key and if it is key then what food should you be producing and should it just be left in the market incentives or should you be using your post-cap agricultural policy levers to encourage farms to grow different things not just to provide public goods in the sense of environmental outcomes great thank you very much for that that is something that we probably need to take away and reflect on quite seriously around food being part of our national security given the events that have kind of brought that to the fore thanks convener can we move on to questions now from Karen Adam hi thank you is this through questions 3d I thought we'd moved on okay thank you we haven't skipped it hello to the committee good afternoon I should say it's not morning anymore I would just like to ask what in terms of adaptations for climate change biodiversity challenges and ecosystem issues are put in place and do you have any example of that and I'll maybe start with Morgan if I can thanks Karen I think in terms of your question it's looking forward for the agriculture bill and having that strategic plan for what we want to look at so I think if you look at it in current terms so I oversee an ag environment climate scheme here and that's got very diverse actions for us to take and we measure those on a yearly basis and then that forms part of a five-year plan that we have for our farm and reserve here so I think in terms of what we want to see in the agriculture bill going forward the government should consider a period of programming such as that which would give you some measure against those outcomes and I think in terms of biodiversity that's really key to see where we are going and it's all well and good saying it but we do need to have some kind of measure on it to see that we're going in the right direction in terms of measuring those gains and reductions in some others such as emissions which is obviously going to be a big part of achieving any of the goals over the next few years and bringing those down does that answer your question? Yeah and also if I can come back in here convener sorry being virtual it's harder to come through the chair just to pick up on that what are the cost implications for those who are trying to mitigate particularly we're looking at the direct effects of climate change we have had a lot of storms up here in the north east and it is really affecting given challenges to our local agricultural sector that haven't been there before and I'm just wondering how does that affect the whole farming industry from your perspective? Yeah I think as we've touched on before as things particularly here the last few summers we've had very different summers so some years we've had incredibly wet a lot of rain which can make things difficult but equally we have had the heat and out here we're a very small island so we're very sensitive to those sort of changes it can be it can have a huge financial implication if things get particularly bad for feeding livestock if all the grass does burn off we're obviously in quite a tricky position and obviously on an island we have multiple logistics to consider to get any additional fodder or anything like that across here and then again relying heavily on CalMac as well to get ferries here which can be extremely difficult for us and in terms of biodiversity as well that puts the resilience of that and we have consistent changes effectively in the environment so it becomes very unpredictable in terms of costs that can have a significant cost to our farming business effectively because we've obviously got that added cost as well which a lot of folk on the work coast will have is just the pure logistics of reacting to the changes in the climate Thank you I think people want to come in We know two things just spring to mind improving our soil health has already been mentioned improves our resilience and improves the resilience to future climate change and future shocks when we increase our soil organic matter content for example if we improve the water holding capacity we improve its resistance to trail we also help it support to support crop growth with nutrients so improving our soil health is an underpinning thing that we can do to improve resilience across all parts of Scotland and across all sectors has already been mentioned and the other thing that there's really good research evidence for in agriculture and in forestry is that more ecologically diverse systems more complex systems have improved resilience compared to monoculture plantations so that's true in monoculture plantations forestry resilient to forestry plantations with more diverse species and different standages different age plants in the trees in the stand and the same is true for agriculture where you have catch crops or cover crops or more diverse rotations they tend to be more resilient to disease and to climate change and to other environmental shocks than more simple monoculture systems so again moving to regenerative agricultural practices and or agroecological practices and diversifying the landscapes will improve resilience and also help to confer better outcomes of biodiversity thank you and Ian wants to come in here yes hi Karen just to say from our perspective demonstration that's what the next stage is for us we talk a lot but actually we can help a farmer who wants to switch out a livestock and show what can be achieved then I think the others other farmers will want to follow suit but it is that the boots on the ground get it done, we have the expertise we need government support we have an advisory board of people who have been doing it down south so we're ready to go and as I said demonstration that's what will start the ball rolling for us of the Scotland David thanks in terms of examples I could point again to our diffuse pollution work in certain catchments of Scotland and particularly the focus on soil management fertilizer and slurry management and also the establishment of buffer zones with the water environment with a view to protecting the water environment but again with multiple benefits for the farmer and for greenhouse gases and for biodiversity we need to step up that level of work as a country and also adopt that landscape approach get cooperative action from farmers and really boost that level of action thank you thanks Karen we've got 10 minutes left I could move on to questions from Alasdor Allan I'll keep it great for that case many of the issues have been touched on already by others but I just wonder if anyone want to come in with a couple of examples of actions because we've heard today that the importance is actions rather than merely outcomes so to get us from here to there in terms of food production systems in the future does anyone want to give a couple of quick examples of quick ones that would get as to where we want to be environmentally soil health Pete has mentioned it and it's been mentioned before but it's where it begins so the first thing is to go to a field and do all the analysis that we can do there's a lot you can do without a laboratory for example farmers could do it themselves a part of the knowledge transfer can be important some of it I spend a lot of time gluteal microscope now we know that than it has been in previous times so once you've got the soil food where established in a field then it's a virtuous cycle literally but yeah beginning in the soil everything starts life starts okay thank you anyone else want to come in lovely thank you I think the point from me would be effective support for high value nature across the board would be really key I think farming systems which are high value for nature have benefits in terms of everything we've been talking about today from reducing the emissions extremely high animal welfare I think Scotland could be a continue to be a real leader in its animal welfare in these sort of systems as well and the grounds particularly again on the west coast suits itself well to low input, low intensity systems that high value for nature takes all the boxes for everything we're talking about today and that delivers as well for nature as much as in any of the other context and I think as well in terms of community communities on the west coast are so often built around farming low input, low intensity systems which I think if that's champion that all these boxes for the agriculture we're going for it thank you and Tim just very briefly Pete mentioned it earlier the other characteristic beyond soils is diversity and that's diversity at the farm scale and diversity at the landscape scale both of those build resilience and the ecological complexity that comes out really aids by diversity and the heterogeneity at the landscape scale allows pockets of trees allows head rows allows a whole range of other things so anything that encourages complex rotational mixed farm scapes will be beneficial from an environmental perspective even if not so beneficial from an absolute food production perspective thank you and Arianne did you have a supplementary? thanks very much just get my question so this is coming back to the questions around ecosystems, resilience on food security in Scotland and I'm going to direct this question to Morgan and Ian so it's actually so in the papers for today there's a statement that says acroecological approaches can provide sufficient nutrients for healthy diets without impinging on natural habitats and then goes on to say however these assumptions imply systemic change which would require significant political and social shifts and shifts in production systems to support more fruit and vegetable production so what do we need to see again on the face of the bill or in the criteria for support payments in order to incentivise the required political and social shifts and a shift in more fruit and veg production so start with Morgan and then I'll come to Ian thank you, I think we're in no doubt in order to reach all of the ambitious targets that the Scottish Government and the ISP have set ourselves redden me is there is going to have to be a reduction in eating it and that does require a behavioural change by everyone I think what systems like the farm I run offer are a a very high quality product at the end of the day but in low quantity so I think it's moving away from that idea of these giant intensive factory almost systems particularly when you're talking about rearing cattle into a system like the one I run which is incredibly low input cattle outdoors all the way around as they're predisposed to be so I think that it's moving towards a more sustainable system to do that and livestock farming again it ticks all the box in terms of the soil health question in terms of Scotland the welfare that we have in this kind of system is high and backed up by for example we're with quality meat Scotland so we're having regular inspections to an extremely high standard so we can back that side of it up as well but I think the biodiversity that cattle deliver it can't be matched if we were to take that away from these less favourable areas which wouldn't lend themselves to logistically sense any fruit and vegetable production from where we are specifically it just makes sense to have these animals here in order to maintain an extremely diverse ecosystem as ecosystem managers effectively they do it all as it were so with the soil health the amount of food that the cattle generate for the wildlife invertebrates and to get back into the soil is enormous and I don't know how how you'd ever be able to replace that I hope that covers the question Well, kind of, yes, Ian Well, livestock I mean does not exist in nature so in nature is better off without it it's cut and dried the issue really is that this is such a huge shift for Scotland I mean the Cabinet Secretary Mary Gougeon in the forwards to the proposal statement says we should not shy away from being clear of significant transformation so that's where we are it's a cultural and societal shift we have a choice to do it at the moment but I fear that with climate breakdown and it's called it what it is it is climate breakdown in pinning on us every day we see today the issue with drought in Asia it's going to recharge shores very quickly it is to a certain degree already so we need to make these choices while we have the choice to do it at a reasonable pace in terms of what's in the bill again support for farmers who want to switch away from livestock farming but to keep them farming and this is part of the Government's commitment to keep farmers in farming we'll need every farmer we have and we'll need more the free security issue we are going to become dependent on our farmers in a way we haven't been before and we can do it I mean some people will say well what about the WTO rules actually when we're talking about farming that is climate positive, good for biodiversity the WTO has what it calls a green box and the kind of regenerative agriculture we're talking about and we've talked about regenerative agriculture for a number of years now so we know these techniques are all out there and have been tried in different places around the world Scotland's climate is not unique we can do it and we can do it within the existing international strictures without breaking any rules that we're just doing thank you Pete, are you hearing us? Yes, I wasn't but I am now so we have some of the most productive land to produce Bruton veg anywhere in the world on the east coast of Scotland so we should be using that land we should be incentivising the farmers of those areas to produce that Bruton I think it goes back to Morgan's point that it's also to forces or regions for regions if you like raising livestock over in Morgan's conditions on the west coast is obviously a better option than trying to raise Bruton trying to grow Bruton veg over there on the east coast it's a different matter and we do have to reduce our consumption of meat and dairy significantly to meet our climate change targets and we do use a lot of our growing land to produce animal feed for livestock so if we reduce our overall consumption of meat and dairy we wouldn't need so much land to produce feed for livestock and we could use that land more sustainably and more healthily to grow Bruton veg particularly over on the east coast but that's why we have to have policies and support mechanisms that can support different actions in different areas because we are very genetically diverse regions within Scotland and we have to support the most appropriate former agriculture in those regions. We've got two members who want to ask questions if the panel would bear with us and stay for a little bit longer that would be appreciated so I could bring in Rachael Hamilton and then Karen Adam. I want to ask about the relationship between the ecosystem resilience and food security and I'd like to concentrate really on the legislation that is not connected to the agribill that could have an impact on ensuring that we can grow more food locally or we can improve the efficiency and productivity of livestock production so one of the examples that I spoke about earlier was rainfall and flooding and I suppose the question would go straight to David Harley again The Flood Risk Management Scotland Act 2009 focuses on flood protection without looking at the flow of the river or the maintenance of soil quality and quantity Do you not think that to help farmers to achieve all those things that we expect them to achieve within the context of the agribill that we should be looking at other legislation alongside that such as that act? You are on mute David In terms of work with scarcity we can improve our resilience there and there is work going on in the Scottish Government looking at the water and sewerage bill to look at that In terms of flooding I am not so sure I don't think so The flooding element is not my area of expertise I can maybe get back to you on that but I don't think it needs I can't answer that question David What I'm worried about is what I see in Scotland and it's been referenced earlier by Tim on the uplands where we're looking at ground and the rainfall in Scotland has pretty much on average been consistent We've had a few peaks and troughs but on average it's been consistent but we're all also seeing flooding Is there not an argument for circularity here and seaper looking at a completely different way of ensuring that we've parched uplands and flooded lowlands For start I don't think that rainfall and climate has been consistent I think that we're getting increasingly drier summers and increasingly flashier types of flooding situations so we are getting a significant shift which is responsible for this I do think that land management has got a role to play in terms of increasing resilience to soil management it can come down to having riparian buffer zones I think that we can make our land more resilient in terms of what we grow and how we grow it I cannot think of situations that require greater powers or considerations for SIPA off the cuff It's just that I want to open it up to the rest of the panel because I do think that there are certain people who think that the Agribill is the panacea that we're putting all our eggs in one basket and I'm concerned about that that everyone is looking too farmas for the solution or blaming farmers for the solution indeed so there are many other things that should be looked at alongside this in that dreadful word holistic manner I wonder, Tim might you have an opinion on that comment Yeah, well I agree with I agree with you in the sense that if you look at the UK's national food strategy that covered I think 19 Corknaet departments including creation land use it's impact on the environment it's impact on food production it's impact on health it's impact on the trade environment it's not an agriculture issue and if there's one thing that I can leave on your desk to think about it it is exactly that and I think your broader question that you put to David of course blocking drains on the uplands makes a big difference to the flashiness of the floods downstream and there are lots of examples of that and I'm sure David is fully on board with that and it's the degree to which that is incentivised from a land management perspective through the agriculture bill versus incentivised through other ways and how you connect up all of the pieces but it really needs to be a systemic approach that you're taking otherwise in the IPCC terminology from the special report on climate change and land that Pete and I were involved in land can do a lot but land cannot do everything and agriculture and the agriculture bill can do a lot but it cannot do everything to solve all of these complex problems I don't know if anyone else wants to come in Beatrice, have you noticed? I think you want to and then we'll have to move on to Karen Just to say Rachel, I think Scotland's going to depend on its farmers far more than it does now in the future so blaming farmers doesn't achieve anything if a farmer is doing the wrong thing they should be encouraged to do the right thing without Scotland's farmers it's kind of dried I mean we can't eat trees can we? No Can we move on to Karen please final question Thank you convener I also wanted to come in a stop here so I'm going to try and be smart and blend the two questions in together so please bear with me here but just really interesting picking up on what Pete was talking about in regards to here in the northeast where I am it is a fantastic climate and we have perfect growing conditions for soft fruits and vegetables but one of the issues that we've had is we can have all this fantastic food growing in the best soil possible but we have nobody to pick it and it's going rotten in fields we have fruit and vegetables going rotten so it's really interesting how interdependent we are in so many factors when it comes to food stability our ecosystems everything is part of a chain and to have that good food that we're talking about we really need to ensure that we're looking at everything in the round here so it's been fantastic hearing from everybody so I'm going to try and wrap this up really and ask is there anything that you feel should be included in the Agri Bill that we have maybe not spoken about things that we need to tie into this who wants to pick that up first Ian again the support for farmers who do not want to farm livestock it's fundamental Pete yeah it's already in there but I think you really need agriculture can be viewed in isolation but it doesn't happen in isolation there really need to be cross reference across the biodiversity strategy and also to a net zero commitment by the change act of the updates and various things we have to make sure that we're cross reference into all of those things they also have to cross reference to the agricultural bill because we can't solve this in isolation Tim as what I said beforehand the question that keeps on coming up implicitly you're assuming that Scotland's food production is for Scotland's food security and that is not the case it might be increasingly the case in future it arguably should be the case if you incentivised it right but at the moment Scotland's food security does not depend on Scotland's production so the question is from a strategic perspective whether food security and public health that comes through diets is an important part of this holistic thinking whether we're not just purely thinking about agriculture and the environment ever Can I come in there convener I find that really interesting because in light of a publication that came out today from the Rowett Institute who are saying that the 19% inflation on food is going to have serious health implications upon the citizens in Scotland so I think absolutely agreeing there and referencing that paper Does Morgan or David want to come in on that? Yeah I think from me again it's about seeing that support mechanism for high value for nature farming and a high proportion of the budget really going towards policies which are targeted on nature restoration and emissions reduction overall I think that's really what this bill has got to do Just to reiterate I think we need to support farmers with advice and we need to facilitate that cooperative action across landscapes and catchments Thank you everyone I'd like to thank witnesses for giving evidence to the committee this morning and for staying a little longer than anticipated That concludes our meeting in public and we'll now move into private session and I'll suspend the meeting for a few minutes to allow Karen to get into the private session