 Yn ystod y gallu holl bwrsfa, mae wedi bod gyda llif ac i'r ddechydig ac yn cerddio'r cyhoeddfa cymorth ac straffoheddu tri ddfl chemical sigur wedi'i chael ddechydig ac nid oedd gefnogi. Yn y gallu chael iron i ddod o'r cerddio cyhoeddfa cyhoeddfa cyhoeddfa cyhoeddfa cyhoeddfa cyhoeddfa Mae yn ein yardau o barn hwylwyr. Rwyf i fod ar gyfer Cysylltu Cysylltu i gyd yn y llwyff deolol gan ddarparu Llywodraeth i ddechrau defnyddio'r wahanol yn teimlo yn Cyllid Nidol. Yn wnewch i ddweud i Gysylltu Cysylltu Cysylltu i g holding 22 ynglynigon, yn ddullu gwirwyr cysylltu Cysylltu a lwyff mewn 13 increfadau Llywodraeth i gyd yn George Leithan, mae'r Llywodraeth yn dweud i gaelagesill, ac mae'n wneud o'n 15—27— Felly, mae'r ddaidd gwasanaeth oedd y gynllunio. Mae'r risiaf yn yr ysgrifetegol ein ddalig sydd yn rhan o'r rhan o'rholeid. Gerrithiau amser i'r panolfiwn hynny, yn i nhw ei fod i'r sgol ymddindig. Miles MacDonald yn ystafell y DUI wedi cael eu cychwyn i'r gwblig i ddordebwydol Pwyllgorol, sy'n golygu i ddaw siaradodol, yn ddau gael yng Nghymru o i ffodol amser i ddaw iawn yn gwneud â'r digwydd ac i ddweud i eu ddaw i'r ddweud i teuluid y ddaw? aethach cyffredin iaith i gael cynllun diwethrol i gyllidol y public dyn nhw? Dwi'n dweud y g yn cyflamsio ar gyfer gwladau ar gyfer gwladau, dweud Derek Penman yng ngyloedd yng ngogliadau, ddechrau HMICS i gael, yn gwybod hwn ac yn gwybod, mae'n teimlo yn gyfathau, mae'n ddiweddog ac mae'n teimlo i gael ar gael hi'r cymryd. Felly, mae'r ddymuno ystyrdd ar y parlysau i gael cyddiadau i gael cael peth anhygoel with the single police service that there would be ministerial, control or direction? There has to be operational independence equally, we have to ensure in democracy, especially the single service, that there is appropriate accountability. The accountability enshrined in statute is the Scottish Police Authority and the inspectorate of constigology, along with a myriad of other organisations, including the ICEReview Commissioner. A fydd y cyfrifysgol yng nghymru ymddyllai maes gan pethau sy'n mynd i ddefnyddio gael hwnnw yn ystod i gael hwnnw, yn unig o'r cyfrifysgol, yn cael hwnnw i England. Fy fydd ei ddechrau'n cyfrifysgol yn unig o'r cyfrifysgol i Ffresfer nôr i nghyrch, yn ddechrau i'r cyfrifysgol i gael hwnnw i Gwniogol, ac yn unig o'r cyfrifysgol i gael hwnnw i gael hwnnw i Nôr i Gwyrdd yng Nghymrae, ac yn ystod i'r cyfrifysgol i are being established by the NHS in April 2014. This work has proved extremely useful in providing quick and appropriate clinical care for a range of people in custody, including people with mental illness. Evidence from extensive research and from pilot work in NHS Tayside in partnership with Police Scotland, looking at improving how we respond to people who present in distress, shows that people seek a more compassionate response and are likely to achieve a more sefydliad hyn gyda meddwl perfectlyeus discussions o'i ei redyn oralonau i gyfer mwyfawr dypa sydd eisiau i wstarйwyr можетwyr ar gyfer bellain. Sut mae gennych jedcyntt upperadau awgol a thonwuef mwyaf o 80eterionaeth, cael oes y cyflym iaith yr oedd surth yng Nghymru? Rwy ris 사건 gwahanol cyfrifydig yn rhywbeth. ers, clywed aír a的thoscerry taethau oherwydd theyig fathorredu iaith, My приз mewn cyfrifiad y fathor a hynny deposited clinical, aethmau'r memen спol 들어가u a levwyr gwahysb Bentwith tot dweithio'r cyffin ast research Elist motiveie i gael odd i mewn chael contentiaeth 這個 oherwydd mae fawr gan y Lerwyn Llywodraeth o beth gyd yn hynlen bydd WEI Llywodraeth pan dd qualche awakgauimpheol fffig ingredients a gasturiau mae flaenol chwaraebol ag y maes o'r cabinet a generous. bydwch chi anodol diem良 hynain gyda i gyda wir!) Ar eich cyfawdd maes oedlai roi mewnio apgleddau i'r anynnod yng Nghymru? Os genai'r ffordd o flynfawr i Jackson Carlaw eich cwestiynau diolch. Mor ffordd o bobl ei w ôl iawn yn fawr i gyda credu Mae Llywodraeth dd sheer ac ar ei ddechrau o drafodau Cymru yn dweud. O'r bwysig o rhai'r ddechrau yn dod dim i'r rhala i hyn. Fe'n wedi'n ein myl argylchedd yn ddiolch i gyfnodau myl argylchedd. Mae'n ddweud yn ddull hwn eich cyfnodau cysuio. Mae'n ddweud i amlwysig o drwg ac yn ddweud. mae'n osies iawn i ddodol i gynnwys cyf까지s gennym yn oeddeithas gael gweld chi, a mae rhai ei ddweud yn ddiddordeb yn cynhyrch i ddryf. Rwy'n gwybod i gael ei ddweud a'i wneud amlитесьr gan hysgwysfaith i gynnwysun i'r ddweud. Mae'r defnydd sy'n bobl sy'n sylfaen i ddweud i gynnwysr ac i ddweud i gynnwysr penderfyniad achos yr eich ddechrau a'r iddynt oedd gynnwysau gw disgrwynt i ddweud. I can give the member the complete assurance that that is the situation, and I can give him the view that when my colleague, Alex Neil, became the Cabinet Secretary for Health, one of the first meetings we had was a meeting between him and myself along with the chief medical officer and the chief constable of the new police service of Scotland. We are aware that both servers require to take action here and its interests of both services, as well as fundamentally those individuals and the communities affected by them that we work together. It cannot be solved solely by law enforcement, it has to be in partnership with health. Question 3, Jamie McGregor. The Air Weapons and Licensing Scotland Bill is a wide-ranging bill that covers a variety of issues in licensing regimes. It creates new licensing regimes in relation to air weapons and sexual entertainment venues. It amends the existing regimes in relation to alcohol, metal dealers, taxis and private hire cars, and public entertainment venues, as well as making amendments across a range of licensing regimes under the Civic Government's Scotland Act 1982. All of that has been informed by consultation and on-going engagement with the relevant stakeholders. Jamie McGregor. I am continuing to receive representations from many constituents in the Highlands and Islands who believe that the proposed new legislation on air guns is disproportionate and will prove costly and impractical. Given that 87 per cent of those who responded to the Government's consultation opposed the plan, air guns are already regulated by law with more than 30 offences on the statute book and that offences involving air guns have fallen by 75 per cent in recent years, where is the Government's hard evidence that the new legislation will have any effect on the tiny percentage of people who will always seek to misuse air guns in a criminal way? The member is correct that the misuse of air weapons has, thankfully, been falling, but it is actually forming a greater proportion of firearms offences than ever before. Although we have a safer Scotland, we still have a legacy of tragedies, not least those who have seen their children slain by them or, indeed, animals who have suffered by them. Over recent months, I have attended events with the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, who are deeply concerned about harm that is perpetrated towards animals by the misuse of air weapons. I think that the case has been proven that there is a requirement for legislation to ensure the safety of our citizens, to ensure that those who have a legitimate use, and in particular those who are involved in pest control and those who Mr McGregor will know and represent in terms of the farming and rural community, we make sure that there are licences available. This is to protect not just the general public from the misuse of air weapons, but also to protect those who, correctly, legitimately have such weapons and should be able to do so through a regulated licensing regime. The Cabinet Secretary for Justice also has a section on metal theft, which was tackled in England and Wales last year by the Scrap Metal Healer Act. In my area, there has been a spate of brain covers and other metal thefts. Is this indicative of a general rise in such criminal activity, and are we witnessing a transfer of criminal activity to Scotland as a result of our more lax legislation? I think that memory is an interesting point. It was a matter of concern for many of utility companies when we were discussing this with them. Thankfully, that has not been arising in the Police Scotland under the task force chaired by the British Transport Police, but operated effectively on the ground by Police Scotland. Action is being taken. Obviously, there are those who seek as part of serious organised crime groups to make money by harming communities, by being involved in robbing from utilities with great danger to communities. That is why the action is being taken appropriately by Parliament. The bill is now in and will be going to committee later this year. As I say, thankfully, because of the vigilance of Police Scotland, we are not seeing any, if I can put it, tourism traffic in terms of criminality, but the police are ever vigilant to that and remain in discussion with all the stakeholders, in particular utility companies. Question 4, in the name of David Torrance, has been withdrawn and a satisfactory explanation provided. Question 5, Bob Doris. To ask the Scottish Government how it supports community organisations in the Glasgow region in using funding from the Cashback for Community programme and other money seized under crime legislation. Cabinet Secretary. I had the great pleasure of announcing in Denison yesterday a further £1.5 million funding for Scottish Sports Futures as part of the further expansion of cashback communities over the next three years. We are continuing to crypt generals hard in their pockets through the produce of proceeds of crime legislation, which resulted in more than £90 million being recovered in the last 10 years. Since I announced cashback in 2007, more than £74 million of nefarious cash has been stripped back from criminals and has been plowed back into communities across Scotland. Glasgow's young people and their communities have directly benefited so far from over £5.3 million of that cashback investment through a wide range of sporting, cultural, youth work and community projects, which has seen over 160,000 opportunities and activities that would not simply have existed without cashback. Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for that answer. I welcome the recent funding of £1.5 million to Scottish Sports Futures from Cashback for Communities, as outlined by the Cabinet Secretary. We are distributed by local partners such as Activist in my region. I would like to commend to you the work of the Gladiator weightlifting programme for young people in Easterhouse, who so far have not accessed such funds locally, but who I am hopeful can benefit going forward, given that they offer both diversionary activities and sporting pathways to success for young people in a deprived community. I ask the Cabinet Secretary perhaps, in the months ahead, to visit this excellent project with me to see for himself the excellent work that it does. I would be happy to try and do that. I do not know the particular organisation, but I obviously appreciate Mr Doris's testimonial for it. I am happy to try and do that subject to diary commitments. I was delighted, as I say, to travel to Kingston yesterday to see the good work that will be on-going. I am aware of the outstanding work that is already on-going with Clyde College and Scottish Power through Street Soccer, the action for children and, indeed, a recent investment in the Celtic Foundation. Glasgow is benefiting not simply from cashback support, but from the cashback support for community-owned organisations that do a remarkable job. I would be delighted to meet that organisation, as well as having met many of these other organisations, and in particular, as I say, with Scottish Sports Futures, who I was delighted to meet at Denison yesterday. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Given that the recent assessment costs the organised crime £1 billion a year in Scotland and that this year's assessment of recovered assets stands about £8 million, does the Cabinet Secretary have any programme in place to up the assets recovered so that cashback can benefit accordingly? Yes, we do. That is why, earlier in the juncture, the Administration established a serious organised crime task force to ensure not only that we seek to minimise and address and tackle serious organised crime but that we take their assets from them. It is part of the on-going strands, the four Ds that we have, and that is one aspect of it. We always seek to improve, sometimes by changing the legislation here, sometimes because it is reserved, aspects by changing it south of the border, but it is certainly the desire of this Government, ably supported by the Slyster General, who leads with the Civil Recovery Unit to ensure that we maximise the harm to those organisations who would cause damage in our communities. Question 6, George Adam. To ask the Scottish Government what consultation it has had with the UK Government regarding the implementation of legislation relating to data laws. As I made clear in the statement that I made to Parliament on Tuesday 5 August, the Scottish Government was not consulted on the matter of the data retention investigatory powers bill. George Adam, I thank the cabinet secretary for his answer. Can I ask the cabinet secretary if he had full powers over the issue? How would he have dealt with it? There has to be greater discussion. That is why we are quite clear that it is a matter for the chamber. It is not a matter for me as an individual or for us as a Government. There are different views within the chamber. I think that when I made the statement on 5 August, Patrick Harvie from the Green Party was quite clear about where he saw the balance being struck, because it is a matter of balance between protecting the rights of individual citizens from intrusion, but also protecting the wider community from harm that individuals may be served. As an administration, we have always been quite clear that the powers are necessary, but we have to ensure proper scrutiny. We have to ensure the protection of the rights of the individual, as well as balancing it for the community. However, I can give the member the complete assurance that it will be for the Parliament to decide as a whole. It will have proper investigation and review. There will be discussion with appropriate stakeholders, not simply police, but those who represent the rights of citizens. Equally, when we bring in such powers, one of the major concerns that existed south of the border in Westminster is how do we also ensure democratic scrutiny and oversight in the years to come? The legislation is one thing, the on-going supervision of some things that will, by very nature, be covert and secret, have to be, as I say, satisfactory to those who represent the democracy. Thank you very much, Dr Lane Murray. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Can the cabinet secretary clarify that, while we know that he is dissatisfied with the process of the legislation, is he content with the content of the legislation? No, I think that the whole debate south of the border was that we were being rushed into it. I do not have the precise quotes in front of me, but they straddle the chamber down in Westminster from David Davies on one side across to Tom Watson, I think it was, and Diane Abbott, both expressing concerns about the situation that they faced, not simply the time scale but what they were being asked to sign up for. What I can reiterate to Elaine Murray is that, as an administration, we recognise that actions like this do require to be taken by Governments on behalf of protection, not simply of our citizens but citizens elsewhere in other jurisdictions who were obliged to protect. It is a matter of balance of where you set that calibration and there may be disputes about where that calibration should be as there are no doubt south of the border. There may very well be in future years in this chamber, but we remain convinced, and I think that even Patrick Harvie is convinced that some aspects will require to take place. What is required to do is to ensure that we have the appropriate legislation with the appropriate checks and balances, and it is that that is causing the concern not simply in this Parliament but south of the border. Many thanks. Question 7, Dave Thompson. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is in the need for innovative thinking when planning new justice-related buildings. The responsibility for justice-related buildings lies with the relevant bodies, but it is clear that we should work together to find ways to continue to provide high-quality facilities for the people of Scotland who should represent good value for money. The Sheriff Court in Livingston has shown the way in which justice and related services can work together to provide an integrated service. While the question is about buildings, access to justice is not just about buildings but how we can take advantage of digital technology to provide our services. The Scottish Government has been working with justice organisations to develop plans and, indeed, published the justice digital strategy at an event that I attended today, outlining our work in this area. Dave Thompson. I thank the cabinet secretary for his answer, given that Eric McQueen, chief exec of the Scottish Court Service, Inverness Sheriff Principal Derek Pyle, former chief inspector of prisons Brigadier Human Row, Highland Council and Police Scotland all believe that a Highland Justice Centre is the way forward for the north. Can the cabinet secretary provide an update on a Highland Justice Centre and, particularly, its linking with a new prison? As the member may know, the Scottish Court Service set out its long-term vision for the courts service in Scotland, which included the development of justice centres and key strategic population centres, including the Borders, Fife, Lanarkshire and the Highlands. The chief executive of SCS has stated that they would be undertaking feasibility studies in these locations, which would involve justice partners and relevant local bodies. The first of those was undertaken in the Borders and reported earlier this year. The member may also be aware that a working group was announced last week to look at alternative tourism opportunities for Inverness Castle, which is currently home to the Sheriff Court. This is, I believe, a welcome move and the SCS are examining how future business accommodation needs in Inverness could be met and funded to allow consideration for the court to move to an alternative location. This will require detailed analysis and discussion with other justice organisations, Scottish Government and Highland Council. To ask the Scottish Government how much the Scottish Court Service will save as a result of the closure of sheriff and justice of the peace courts. The Scottish Court Service estimated the following savings from the court closure programme. The annual savings in terms of running costs will amount to around £1 million and there will also be one-off savings of backlog maintenance, which will not have to be paid out of the public purse of around £3 million. The net mill. I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. We have already seen our justice system impacted by delays in cases being heard and the many concerns expressed by campaigners about the unseen costs of the proposals to close 11 sheriff courts now coming true, not to mention the lack of privacy in the Aberdeen Court, for example, for accused people and their lawyers, which is currently causing problems. Does the cabinet secretary feel any regret for the way in which the Scottish Government have handled the closures and will he task Audit Scotland to look at the closures to investigate if Scottish taxpayers have indeed seen the predicted level of savings? No, I won't. I believe the best people to account for this of the Scottish Court Service. I was delighted, therefore, just a few weeks back to go to Aberdeen Sheriff Court to see the newly opened civil court buildings that I think are outstanding. I pay great tribute to Sheriff Derek Pyle, Sheriff Principal Derek Pyle, for the outstanding work and leadership that he has shown there. There have been challenges to the court system because of an increase in some types of proceedings. These have to be dealt with by the court. They are being given its additional financial assistance. That is something that I very much welcome, but I believe that the Lord President has looked at matters, has indicated that we require to get the justice system into Scotland, into the 21st century, into a better landscape and that he has my full support in that. Many thanks. We now move to questions on rural affairs and the environment. Question 1, Colin Beattie. To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the level of pillar 2 funding for rural development that an independent Scotland could expect to receive from the EU. As a result of the recent agricultural allocations under CAP, Scotland will find itself at the bottom of the league tables for both pillar 1 and pillar 2 funding. However, of course, with a seat at the top table in Europe, an independent Scotland would have the opportunity to negotiate itself a much better deal in the next common agricultural policy post 2020. Indeed, have Scotland been independent in the recent negotiations and been able to negotiate a per hectare deal similar to Ireland's? It could have secured an extra 2.5 billion euros in rural development funding alone. That is funding that has been used to support vital capital grants, for instance, for farms and crofters, support for new entrants, ag environment schemes, climate change projects or community initiatives in rural areas. Colin Beattie. I thank the cabinet secretary for his response. Does the cabinet secretary agree with me that it is nothing short of scandalous that in the recent current negotiations, 16 member states negotiated additional uplifts for rural development while the UK Government chose not to negotiate any uplift, resulting in Scotland having the lowest funding for rural development in Europe? With Scotland languishing at 12 euros per hectare while the European average is 76 euros, is it not time we took our seat at the top table in Europe as a matter of urgency? Cabinet secretary. Colin Beattie perffult illustrates why you should not ask other people who do not share your interests or your priorities to negotiate on your behalf in international negotiations. It is a fact that Scotland went into this recent negotiation with the lowest level of rural development funding in Europe. 16 other countries already above Scotland in the league table negotiated an even better deal and the UK Government, despite Scotland's request, refused to lift a finger to improve Scotland's position in the league table. Despite being a largely rural country, with huge opportunities in rural communities, we could get the right investment in place. We suffered because UK ministers refused to stand up for Scotland or listen to concerns from this country. That is indeed why we need a yes vote in four weeks' time so that we can speak for ourselves in Europe. Alex Ferguson. I wonder if the cabinet secretary might accept two things. Firstly, it looks somewhat strange for him to call for any increase in any aspect of EU funding when his party's representatives at Westminster wanted an even greater reduction in the overall EU budget that was eventually achieved. Secondly, would he accept that whatever our constitutional situation is, there will be no opportunity to renegotiate the CAP budget before 2020 and that any assertions that we would be better or worse off under different circumstances are nothing but idle speculation? On surprisingly, I profoundly disagree with both points made by Alex Ferguson. Indeed, his first point, he misleads on the facts given that the SNP MPs in the Westminster did not argue for a reduction in the CAP budget, which comprises 38 per cent of the overall European budget. Indeed, the SNP made suggestions where some modest savings could be made in the overall EU budget and argued against David Cameron's proposals to increase the overall EU budget. The second fundamental point is our share of the CAP budget. The size of the CAP budget is one debate. Scotland's share of the CAP budget is what really matters here. We get the lowest level share of that budget in the UK and the whole of Europe. There is a funding formula that was adopted that applies to all member states, big and small. We did not have that applied to Scotland, so we are not a member state. Had it applied to Scotland, we would have qualified automatically under a formula for an extra billion euros between 2015 and 2020. On Alex Ferguson's second point on the next common agricultural policy, the Government is not arguing that we can reopen the CAP budget for this spending period up to 2020. What the SNP is arguing is that, had we been independent for the recent negotiation, we would be a billion euros better off under pillar 1. We are also arguing that the people of Scotland have a choice for the next CAP negotiation, which will start within a year or two of Scotland becoming independent in 2016. Who shall be in the driving seat to represent Scotland, an uncaring, disinterested UK minister from Whitehall, or Scotland's farming minister who will strike a much better deal for Scotland's farmers and crofters? Question 2, Stuart McMillan. To ask the Scottish Government what impact marine protected areas will have on recreational boating and marine tourism. Minister Paul Wheelhouse. The 13 new marine protected areas we recently designated should serve to help protect the rich waters of Scotland that so many sailors and other marine tourists enjoy. Recreational boating and marine tourism requires a healthy marine environment, and for this reason, the Scottish branch and marine boating association have thrown their support behind the NPAs that will protect the ecosystems and waters that people come from all over the world to enjoy. I would therefore express a view that NPAs will potentially boost marine tourism and the economic value that derives from the sector. Stuart McMillan. I thank the minister for the reply, and the minister will be aware of the economic benefits that the records for boating and marine tourism sectors actually bring to Scotland, and as a former member of the CPEG, he is very much aware of the issues that have been raised in the crossbarter group. I would like to ask the minister whether the Scottish Government will undertake research to monitor the social and economic benefits of marine protected areas and how that will impact on the marine tourism sector. Minister. I certainly recognise the interest that there has been at this. The recent evidence session on NPAs taken at last week's RACI committee, one of the stakeholders I know did suggest that the statutory review of the NPA network every six years should also include the increased impact assessment, the costs and benefits of the network. I am attracted to that proposal and intend to look into the feasibility of that and what scope there is to include assessment of the economic effects and benefits of marine protected areas on marine tourism, given the strong interest in that issue. Claudia Beamish. As the minister knows, so-called blue carbon is captured and stored across a range of seabed types such as seagrass. A new SNH report, assessment of carbon budgets and potential blue carbon stores in Scotland's coastal marine environment, states that ocean acidification could affect the marine environment adversely. In view of that, can the minister provide details of how the carbon storing habitats could receive protection within the marine protected area network if not today then as the report only came out today in the near future before the review date of 2018? Minister. Well, it's certainly true. I know that Claudia Beamish has expressed her strong interest in that issue through the process of the RPP2 as well, looking at blue carbon. It's something we are committed to looking at in the next RPP3 and it's a developing area of policy work, a bit like Peatlands was in respect of the previous report on proposals and policies. So I do give the member an assurance on the members in the chamber that we are taking a considerable interest in this work on those kind of habitats and see what contribution they can make to our climate change targets. Thank you very much. Question 3, Alex Johnson. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met the British Veterinary Association. Cabinet Secretary Richard Lochhead. Scottish Government officials are in at least weekly contact with the British Veterinary Association. There are a wide range of issues across animal health and welfare portfolio. The chief veterinary officer for Scotland met formally with the BVA on 15 May and discussed a range of issues including veterinary surveillance, non-stun slaughter, regulation of veterinary professions, dog tail docking and compulsory macrochipping of dogs. She will meet again formally with them on 9 September. Alex Johnson. Cabinet Secretary, if he or his officials have had specific talks regarding concerns about ritual slaughter and whether, as a result, he has any intention of bringing forward proposals to include on-labeling on Scottish meat whether stunning took place prior to slaughter. Cabinet Secretary. That is an issue that we have been looking at in recent weeks and months. The religious slaughter of animals for food is, of course, a difficult, sensitive and complex issue. We have to be very careful in terms of any debate around labelling and take on board the view of Scotland's faith communities. It's widely accepted that animals should be stunned before slaughter to properly safeguard their welfare but we do have to recognise the importance that Jewish and Muslim communities, in particular, are attached to being supplied with meat from animals, slaughtered in accordance with their religious beliefs. I understand that the European Union is contemplating looking at this issue and I will ensure that Scotland has a voice in those discussions. Question 4, Eileen McLeod. To ask the Scottish Government how independence would support rural development funding in rural communities such as in Dumfries and Galloway. As I just explained in response to the debate, independence will give a positive boost to communities across Scotland in many, many ways and our rural communities in particular would stand to gain from potentially significant increased budgets brought by having our own voice in Europe and negotiating for Scottish priorities. Eileen McLeod. I thank the cabinet secretary for his answer. The cabinet secretary will be aware that just as Scotland received the lowest level of rural development funding in the EU Dumfries and Galloway has a disproportionately high reliance on agriculture and related rural-based industry for employment and also the lowest full-time wages in Scotland. Can the cabinet secretary outline what opportunities would an independent Scottish Government have to address this situation? Eileen McLeod quite rightly raises the fact that Dumfries and Galloway, like the rest of Scotland, lost out significantly from the fact that Scotland did not have her own voice in the recent negotiations over the common agricultural policy of the one which is direct farm payments and those that flow through pillar 2 of the policy which is rural development funds. Dumfries and Galloway not just the primary producers in terms of the farmers but also the rural businesses, the village hall committees, renewable energy projects, agri environment projects and so the list goes on all lost out because we do not have our fair share of EU rural budgets. That's something Scotland can put right in four weeks time and we can get a fair share of those budgets as having someone going to those negotiations who represent Scotland's priorities, Scotland's interests and does not negotiate against them. Question 5, Mike McKenzie. To ask the Scottish Government what benefit farmers and crofters would have through pillar 1 funding in an independent Scotland. Secretary Richard Lochhead. I can detect an emerging theme in question time today but can I just say that an independent Scotland with a seat at the top table in Europe will have the opportunity to influence the next cap negotiations and lift ourselves off the bottom of the league tables, as I've said before for both pillars of the common agricultural policy budgets. Had Scotland been independent during the recent negotiations we would have benefited from the EU minimum rate of 196 euros per hectare which, as I've said before, would have meant about an extra 1 billion euros of support over the next cap period up to 2020. Thank you, Mike McKenzie. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. I agree with me then that those are the reasons why no less than four former NFUS presidents have publicly supported the Yes campaign. Cabinet Secretary. Can I just say that it is very significant that four former NFU presidents declared for Yes last week four former NFU presidents who are still active in farming affairs in this country and still have their fingers on the pulse of the mood of farmers in crofting and the impact of public policy in those vital industries. The fact that a formula was agreed by Europe which would have delivered an uplift to Scotland had we been a member state is surely something very pertinent to the future of our rural communities and farmers and crofters in food production in this country and to rub salt into the wound even though we lost out on our share of the budget the UK were given £190 million because of Scotland's low payments to get the whole of the UK rate above the threshold to qualify for those funds. The UK Government then took the decision despite the fact that Scotland is the lowest level of funds in the whole of Europe already and it was only because of Scotland the UK got that cash to deny Scotland the £190 million. That is scandalous and that is why the four NFU presidents will be followed by thousands of farmers in four weeks time voting Yes in the referendum. Alex Ferguson Thank you, Presiding Officer. On the back of that reply that if four former NFU presidents is a resounding endorsement for Yes are not 16 former NFU presidents vice presidents and the chair of qualities meets Scotland a four times more important resounding backing for the now campaign. Can I just say that I respect the views of all farming leaders and former farming leaders in this debate irrespective of which generation they represent and when they were vice president or presidents. It's very serious the decisions and the views that people have to adopt and take in relation to Scotland's future but if someone has said that four former NFU presidents several years ago were going to declare for Yes in a Scottish independence referendum I think I'd have been pleasantly surprised at that point in time but here we are and it actually is the case that I have met literally hundreds if not thousands of farmers who have told me they are voting Yes in four weeks time and it's one vote per farmer and that's what matters for Scotland's future. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to reduce red tape for agricultural industries. In 2012 I commissioned Brian Pack to undertake an independent report into how best to undertake for farmers and land managers. Following extensive consultation with the industry and stakeholders the report was presented to me at the Turf Show a few weeks ago. The report contains 61 recommendations aimed at reducing red tape and I immediately accepted one of the main recommendations to establish an overarching advisory board to help improve the strategic and operational alignment of all the delivery bodies in Scotland and I'll make announcements in due course about the other recommendations. Gordon MacDonald I'm pleased that he's considering setting up an advisory board to help cut farming red tape that will free up more time for farmers to farm by reducing on-farm inspections and bureaucracy as I'm sure welcome use. Can the cabinet secretary give an indication of when the advisory board will be up and running? Cabinet Secretary We have already started to look at how that advisory board should be comprised and I hope to make announcements in the coming weeks. It's worth saying why it's important that this recommendation is because we have many agencies and bodies who operate in rural Scotland and who farmers and crofters and land managers have to deal with therefore I think it makes perfect sense the more aligned they are the better the same systems, perhaps one point of contact whatever these steps may be in the future that could only be of benefit in terms of reducing bureaucracy and red tape and time for our hardworking Question 7, Angus MacDonald To ask the Scottish Government whether an independent Scotland would see an increase in funding from the EU, European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and if so by how much? It's a very good question from Angus MacDonald and I detect the opposition MSPs don't like it so I shall I think however it's very very important to relay the truth to all parties in this chamber Scotland will receive the third lowest level of funding in the whole of Europe as part of the new European Maritime and Fisheries Fund recently negotiated by member states we received just 1.9% of the EMFF budget despite a fleet landing 8% I repeat that 8% of fish caught in Scottish waters in EU waters Once again the UK Government of course let Scotland down by not fighting for a fairer share of these important budgets as a member state on her own right we would be able to negotiate a far better deal between fishermen, processors and agriculture sector fishing is many many times more important to Scotland than it is to the UK as a whole and that's why with independence it will be treated with respect and is a much greater priority than it ever will be by a distant and disinterested UK Governments Angus MacDonald I thank the cabinet secretary for his reply it's clear that Scotland's fishing industry has been just as poorly served by successive UK Governments as our agricultural industry has fish landings as the cabinet secretary has said in Scotland account for 8% of the EU's total landings and 12% of EU aquaculture production but we receive only 1.4% of the EFF allocation does the cabinet secretary think that's fair cabinet secretary it's just to put this debate into context of this issue into context Scotland represents the fourth largest sea area in the whole of Europe just think about that for a second the fourth largest sea area in the whole of Europe another fascinating statistic 1% of the fish taken from European waters is taken from Scottish waters 20% the fishing industry is many times more important as I said before to the UK and it is to Scotland as a whole despite that we receive 1.9% 1.9% of the European fisheries fund and for those who say independence won't make things better all I say in return to that is independence simply couldn't make anything worse because we are in the worst position possible to answer those funding share outs we can only do better having our own voice in these negotiations to get a fair share of these vital funds for Scotland thank you it's interesting that the cabinet secretary has told the rural committee that the UK and Scottish government work very well together on fisheries matters but anyway can the minister enlighten this parliament about the implications on Scottish fishermen that would arise if the fisheries fund support were to be lost especially as the majority of experts on the EU as well as EU officials have concluded that an independence Scotland would not automatically be admitted to the EU cabinet secretary order next the member will be accusing independence of not delivering some kind of television service for Scotland they get more and more preposterous by the day there are some issues I welcome when I work with the UK government in fisheries negotiations however where we do succeed in European negotiations in terms of getting support from the UK is where Scotland's interests coincide with the rest of the UK the difficulty is where Scotland's interests don't coincide with the rest of the UK that's where we need our own voice in these negotiations at the moment when we get the concessions from the UK government they happen to be in issues where they coincide with the rest of the UK in other words they're going to be negotiated for in any case and therefore an independent Scottish voice can add weight to where we agree but where we disagree in our different priorities we'll have our own voice and own ability to secure a good deal for Scotland's fishermen very much and that concludes portfolio questions for this afternoon point of order Mr MacArthur thank you very much on a point of order you'll know