 The next item of business is portfolio questions and the portfolio questions today is rural affairs and islands. If a member wishes to ask a supplementary question, they should press the request of speak button during the relevant question or enter the letter R in the chat function during the relevant question. As ever, I would appreciate short and succinct questions and answers in order to get as many members in as possible. I call question number one, Willie Coffey. To ask the Scottish Government how the regional food fund is supporting the promotion and advancement of Scotland's produce. The regional food fund plays an important role in supporting regional activities, local community events, networks and other collaborative initiatives, with small grants of up to £5,000. That in turn delivers long-term benefits to Scotland's local food and drink sector. Since its launch in 2018, the regional food fund has provided over £550,000 to 121 projects the length and breadth of Scotland, and the 2022-23 round, which closed for applications on 9 May, will provide even more support for great local food initiatives across the country. Willie Coffey. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. Ayrshire boasts some of the best food that Scotland has to offer. Organisations such as the Ayrshire Food Hub in Crossroads, in my constituency, with a unique farm shop run by the local community, are central to showcasing this world-class produce. Does the cabinet secretary share my view that organisations such as this are crucial in ensuring that it becomes the norm for all Scots to take a keen interest in their food, valuing it and knowing what constitutes good food as we strive to become a good food nation? I absolutely do. I recognise that Ayrshire is indeed an area that is famous for its food, and I know that the Ayrshire Food Hub received nearly £5,000 in January 2020 from the regional food fund. I know that, because of the delay to progress caused by the pandemic, I am delighted to see that, as we are emerging from the pandemic over the past couple of years, that it is now successfully operating a cafe, a farm shop, a training kitchen, event space and community garden, all with the aim of promoting the best of the area's produce. The member is absolutely right. It is initiatives such as this that are really fundamental in helping us to achieve our vision of being a good food nation in Scotland. The project embraces everything that we want to see as part of that, involving the community, showcasing local produce. There is the education and training element, and I wish them every success. NFUS called for, in March, the greater commitment to fund the sustainable agricultural grant scheme to assist farmers to use resources more efficiently and to temporarily suspend the EFAS component of the 2022 greening requirement to bring additional arable land back into productive use, with a focus on the EFA follow land being used for nitrogen-fixing protein crops. That has not been delivered despite the fact that you have the powers to do so now. When will you relax the EFAS rules and where is the extra funding provided through SACGS needed to support farmers and food producers? In relation to the EFA areas, which the member has just outlined, that is a question that I have addressed a number of times in the chamber today. First of all, I want to set out that the Government is clear in its commitment to supporting farmers and crofters to produce more of our food more sustainably, but it is important that we maintain and enhance our efforts and not scale those back when it comes to tackling the climate and nature emergency. Events that are on-going in Ukraine just now only strengthen the case for doing more, because ultimately that is how we can make our farms and food production systems more resilient. When it comes to changes to greening, there are a number of considerations in relation to that that we have to take account of, but there is flexibility within the greening rules for farmers to apply them according to their own circumstances. For example, they could choose options other than to follow such as green cover crops or catch crops too, but we are working with the industry and we will work with them to promote the flexibilities that are already there, and we will continue to work with them to find practical solutions to bolster food production in these times of uncertainty while continuing to contribute to wider climate change and biodiversity objectives too. This week, the Food Coalition wrote to the First Minister calling for the establishment of an independent food commission to drive forward the change that we need to make Scotland a good food nation. We have a land commission, a social security commission, a poverty and inequality commission, a just transition commission, but so far the Cabinet Secretary does not think that food policy merits an independent food commission. Will the Cabinet Secretary listen to civil society, local authorities and the majority of MSPs in this Parliament avoid destroying the consensus that we have seen in our journey to become a good food nation and give it back to an independent food commission? I do not think that it is fair for the member to categorise it in that way, especially accusing me of ignoring the calls that are out there. I think that I made it perfectly clear during stage 2 consideration of the good food nation bill that I am open to looking at that and looking at the oversight functions. In fact, the member will be aware that we have a meeting shortly to discuss what that might look like ahead of stage 3 consideration of the good food nation bill. Of course, I am open to considering those options and looking at that and trying to build that consensus across the chamber. Before I call question 2, I will make my plea again for short and succinct questions and, indeed, answers. Otherwise, I will not be able to get through all the questions. To ask the Scottish Government whether, following the UK Government's launch of a seafood exports fund, it will launch a Scottish seafood fund. We already have an established fund in Scotland called the Marine Fund Scotland, and in recognition of the lack of UK Government support following Brexit, we funded seafood Scotland to the tune of £1.8 million in 2021-22 to enable it to carry out export support activity of the kind identical to that now being proposed in the £1 million seafood exports pillar of the UK Government's UK seafood fund. It is entirely appropriate that the UK Government has belatedly taken responsibility for some of the costs of an imposed Brexit, which inflicted significant and lasting damage to Scottish seafood markets. The £1 million package being offered by the UK Government is paltry amount compared to the real costs of Brexit, and the UK Government must also take responsibility for those, as well as honouring its promise to replace lost EU funding in full. I thank the cabinet secretary for not directly answering my question, but the success of seafood exports and, indeed, food security, which the cabinet secretary said recently, is as important as energy security, depends on our fishing industry's ability to catch. The Scottish Fisherman's Federation has flagged that recent developments such as expansion of floating offshore wind, marine generation and associated connections could have an impact on fishing grounds and the Scottish Fleet. What steps are being taken to ensure that the future sustainability of our fishing industry in producing climate smart food is not relegated to collateral damage in an increasingly crowded marine environment? I am sorry that the member did not appear to listen to my first response in answer to his question, which answered it directly. In relation to the second point, which he does, which is a vitally important issue, and which I have discussed with the fishing industry and SFF, I would direct him towards our blue economy vision, which sets out what we are looking to achieve for our marine sectors and industries in Scotland and our ambitions for the future, which clearly points to the importance of the fishing industry in Scotland, which produces a carbon-neutral and sustainable source of protein, which is going to be important both now and into the future. How we manage our marine resources in what is becoming an ever-increasingly cluttered space? I know that there is a lot of competing interests there that we need to take account of, but we are trying to manage our way through that as best as we can, taking account of all the different interests. £1 million to help exports hardly seems like fair compensation, given the utter havoc that the Tories' hard Brexit has wrecked on the fishing and seafood industries. They were completely ignored during the negotiations that brought about the trade and co-operation agreement, and now it seems likely that the Tories will once again throw our fishers and those in the seafood industry under the bus and a trade war with the EU. Does the cabinet secretary share my view that if that does happen it will put beyond any doubt the disinterest and contempt that the UK Government has for Scotland's seafood sector? The funding that is being offered by the UK Government is little more than a sticking plaster when you compare it to the huge costs that have been incurred because of the new trade barriers and avoidable bureaucracy arising from the UK Government's Brexit deal. Ever since the 2016 referendum, successive UK Governments have completely mishandled relations with our closest allies and partners in the EU. The interests of Scotland and its people have suffered grievously as a result of that, and none more so than the Scottish seafood sector itself. As the European Union External Affairs Secretary had said earlier this week, the UK Government is now intending to legislate to enable unilateral action to supply parts of the Northern Ireland protocol is deeply concerning. To breach an international treaty, which had been signed in good faith and hailed by the Prime Minister as a fantastic moment, is bad enough, but to contemplate that action when facing a cost of living crisis is unthinkable and completely indefensible. To ask the Scottish Government how it is supporting farmers to utilise new technological advances. Technology is vital to address the economic and environmental challenges facing the agricultural industry. We continue to offer meaningful, technical and financial support in this area. For example, the Farm Advisory Service offers a range of high-quality advice to help to facilitate the uptake of technology to maximise profitability and enhance sustainability. Also, technology-based projects have the opportunity to apply for funding through the Knowledge Transfer and Innovation Fund to demonstrate the practical application of technology in agricultural business. I thank the minister for that answer. On Monday this week, innovation funding was removed from the Scottish Government's environmental agriculture and food research strategy. Can the minister explain why that has been and why the funding was removed? Can she reassure farmers that their acrofood industry that the Scottish Government is still committed to supporting innovation in new farming methods and technology? The Scottish Government launched the Knowledge Transfer and Innovation Fund, which is exactly for innovation. In April this year, the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and Islands opened KTF for applications and offered up to £1.6 million of support for projects, looking to support the uptake of technology among a broad range of other topics. The application window is now closed and applications are being assessed for that award. On the subject of support for farmers, it is the Scottish Government that remains committed to supporting active farming and food production, although other parts of the UK are offering farmers money to leave the industry. Does the cabinet secretary therefore share my view that the Scottish Government needs to take no lessons from the Tories on how to support Scotland's agricultural sector? Minister, please resume your seat. I will remind members that I am in the chair and I will decide what is relevant and what is not. I do not appreciate a lot of sedentary comments, as I think that people will now be aware. This Government is determined to support a sustainable, vibrant rural economy. We will provide stability to farmers while also supporting them and other land managers and rural stakeholders to deliver our climate change and biodiversity objectives. That is why we are collaborating with the industry through the Agricultural Reform Implementation Oversight Board, which this Government set up and providing a budget of £680 million in 2022-23 in agricultural support and environmental payments, including direct payments, the Scottish Rural Development programme and agricultural transformation. To ask the Scottish Government what support it is providing to increase and retain the population in Scotland's islands. Supporting islands to increase and retain their populations is an ambition across all parts of Scottish Government, as demonstrated by this year's programme for government. Within that, there are a range of commitments that could help to address our population challenges, including the support for the national islands plan, as well as national commitments such as developing rural visa pilots and a remote rural and islands housing action plan. I thank the cabinet secretary. The objective of attracting and retaining population in islands and the funding that is made available are both very welcome, but the cabinet secretary will be aware of my concerns, as well as many of my ordinary constituents, about the proposed island bond scheme. We will therefore agree to consider using that funding in ways that make island communities more resilient and offer more employment opportunities for islanders. For example, introducing a third aircraft on Orkney's internal routes, using low-emissions fuel parts funded through green transport innovation funding, it would undoubtedly help to attract and retain population, not just on one island, but across the outer isles in my constituency. I know that this is an issue that the member has raised concern about previously and again today, but I want to say again that the island's bond has never been presented as some sort of silver bullet to address all our island population challenges, because it is just one element of our wider work across all of Scottish Government to support island communities. The island's bond consultation along with our on-going engagement will really help us to understand the challenges in greater detail and will continue to work with local authorities, our island communities and other island stakeholders to try to address those issues. The on-going crisis with our ferries continues to impact on individual small businesses and agricultural sector, as well as harming existing residents and businesses. That has made our islands less attractive places to live, work and do business. So can I ask the cabinet secretary has she made any serious assessment of the economic impact of the on-going issues with ferry routes connecting our islands? We just want to reiterate, just as I was saying about the island's bond there, we know that this is a multi-faceted issue. We know that the problems that our island communities experience, whether that is in relation to transport and housing, so it is about how we tackle all those issues in the round. The member will no doubt be aware of the £580 million investment that we have planned over the course of the next five years and also the work that is on-going in relation to the island's connectivity plan, a draft of which will be published towards the end of the year and will address some of those problems. To ask the Scottish Government what support it provides to remote and rural communities in the Lloven region. In the previous leader-funded programme, the Tyne-esque area covering Mid and East Lothian was allocated £3.5 million and West Lothian £2.1 million over the course of the six-year programme. In 2021-22, the Scottish Government made available over £100,000 of funding ring fence for rural communities in the Tyne-esque and West Lothian area. Over £360,000 will also be made available this financial year to continue that valuable community led work in rural communities across Tyne-esque and West Lothian. Support in mind Scotland believes that there needs to be increased opportunity to talk about mental health and wellbeing in non-medical environments such as clubs, venues and meeting places. A like model of social prescribing should be adopted where individuals are informed of support or opportunities within their community to tackle loneliness. Will the cabinet secretary commit to exploring the support to support those in rural communities especially within my region? I am more than happy to look at any initiatives that can help in terms of offering that support. I know that people are under a lot of pressure right now, particularly in our rural communities. That is a matter on which I am happy to engage with the member further. Is the cabinet secretary aware that many of my constituents in the unithgal constituency in Lothian living in rural and remote communities rely on LPG and oil heaters in off-grade homes with prices for home heating oil increasing by as much as 126 per cent? Households who rely on heating oil are not currently subject to off-terms price cap, leaving them vulnerable to uncontrolled price increases. They face a very difficult winter. Can the cabinet secretary commit to working with cabinet colleagues to identify what specific immediate support can be made available to those individuals in rural and remote areas many of whom are elderly and are on fixed incomes? I am more than happy to commit to that, because I know that heating oil and LPG consumers are facing significant increases in their energy costs. Of course, energy pricing and the powers in relation to that are reserved, meaning that the Scottish Government cannot act to provide additional protection for those consumers. However, we have engaged with the UK Government to raise those concerns about the recent unprecedented rises in heating fuel costs for off-gas grid customers in parts of Scotland, as well as stressing the urgent need for protections for those consumers. Nonetheless, we are doing everything that we can with the powers that we have to assist those who are worst affected and have recently allocated a further £10 million to our fuel and security fund. That fund is delivered through trusted third sector partners, including the Fuel Bank Foundation and Advice Direct Scotland, who administer our home heating support fund. I would urge those in need of that support to please get in touch with those organisations. I would like to ask the Scottish Government what engagement it has had with the UK Government regarding the continuing delays to post-Brexit border checks on imports from the European Union. I am looking at the actual wording of the question on the business bulletin and just to remind members that that actual wording must be read out into the record. I ask Mr Fairlie to please read out the actual question as it appears on the business bulletin, and I hope that he has that to hand. If not perhaps a kind member, Mr Stewart, could assist. Thank you very much, Mr Stewart. Mr Fairlie, could you please read out the question as it appears on the business bulletin? My assistant's here apologies. I am not quite sure how I got that mixed up. I would like to ask the Scottish Government what engagement it has had with the UK Government regarding the impact on agriculture in the food and drink sector in Scotland of the report of continuing delays to post-Brexit border checks on imports from the EU. On 28 April 2022, the UK Government made an announcement on further delays to the introduction of controls on imports from the EU without any consultation or meaningful engagement with the Scottish Government failing to use any of our channels of communication. That kind of conduct just isn't acceptable. On 4 May, I wrote to George Eustis expressing my deep frustration and concern regarding the continuation of biosecurity risks and the uneven playing field between Scottish importers and exporters following this latest delay, and I've urged the UK Government to begin meaningful dialogue on future borders policy. Recently, the NFUS president, Martin Kennedy, spoke in scathing terms of the prolonged failure of the UK Government regarding exports to Europe and how that showed an astonishing level of incompetence and failure to support the Scottish producers and our food and drink sector. Yes, at the rain committee, I put the view to George Eustis, who cited the potential to exacerbate the cost of living crisis as the reason that the UK Government is giving for continued delays. Given that Brexit has been a driver of the cost of living crisis in the first place, does the cabinet secretary's year might utter bewilderment at the UK Government using a crisis largely of its own making as a reason for not fixing our shambles? That is also of their own making. The UK Government's announcement is the fourth delay to import checks on goods from the EU since Brexit, and for every delay, the UK Government has continued to ignore the uneven playing field that exists between our Scottish importers and exporters. We have written repeatedly to the UK Government to highlight concerns around the effects of its bad Brexit deal. Just last week, the cabinet secretary for finance wrote to the UK chancellor highlighting the damaging effects of this delay on multiple sectors, including specifically on our food and drink sector. The food and drink sector in Scotland and the UK has borne the brunt of the hard Brexit deal, pursued by the UK Government and particularly through the loss of freedom of movement and free trade. I also touched on the very real bi-security risks that are presented by that in my opening response. I met Paul MacLennan and one of his constituents, who is a pig farmer. I spoke to other pig farmers who are all seriously concerned about the devastating impact of diseases such as African swine fever and the impact that that can have if it reaches our shores. I only wish that those concerns were treated as seriously as what they need to be. To ask the Scottish Government how many grants have been awarded through the Croft House grant scheme in the Western Isles since 2007? The Scottish Government has a track record of investing to improve croft housing. Since 2007, we have approved more than £23.6 million in croft house grant payments, helping to build and improve more than 1,085 croft homes. Of those, 526 grants have been awarded to recipients in the Western Isles, but the total grant award of more than £11 million or around 47 per cent of all grants have been approved. I thank the cabinet secretary for that very helpful answer. The Croft House grant scheme is an excellent method of helping crofters with the cost of housing and retaining families in island communities. Does the cabinet secretary have any view on whether the astronomical recent rises that we have seen in the cost of building materials may need to be taken into account in the scheme going forward? The UK Government holds most of the levers to address the pressures on the cost of living, but the Scottish Government is providing support where we can to ensure that all people who live in rural areas and communities and businesses are given as much support as possible to deal with the rising issues. Croft house grants can be used towards a new build or towards house improvements, which I agree provides helpful support for crofters and the wider croft in communities. However, it is also important to remember that that can be used in conjunction with the self-build loan fund 2, which offers loans of up to £175,000 to eligible applicants for development costs to support build completion of a new house. The fund that Mary Gougeon is talking about, the Croft House grant, paid out £6.2 million out of a total designated £11 million. That is vital funding for crofters, for new entrants, for people to upgrade their houses and make them energy efficient. Is it not about time that you supported crofting communities? When will the crofting reform come forward in a cabinet decision? I want to address Rachael Hamilton's first point and highlight how the Croft Housing grant scheme works, because it is a demand-led scheme and no scheme application has ever been refused because of a lack of budget. Funding for the Croft House grant scheme is provided retrospectively in up to three stages. For that reason, funding that is committed in any financial year will be claimed by applicants and paid in both the current and following two to three financial years. The scheme, as it is, has been developed following extensive engagement with key stakeholders. I have said it in the chamber before, and I have said it in committee to the member that we have made a commitment that we will be looking to reform crofting law. Of course, that depends on the decisions that are taken by the Parliament itself in terms of the legislative timetable, but we have committed to that and have every intention of delivering on that commitment. Thank you, cabinet secretary. That concludes portfolio questions on rural affairs and islands. I apologise for not being able to reach number eight. However, I did indicate on several occasions that that was what I feared we would come to pass and it did. There will now be a very short pause before we move on to the next item of business.