Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 18 January 2012
18 Jan 2012 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Common Agricultural Policy (Reform)
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate on the common agricultural policy. I congratulate Rob Gibson and the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee on their novel approach of initiating a pre-committee report debate.
I will focus my remarks on the Highlands and Islands and the pillar 2 rural development programme.
It is worth pausing the debate for an instant and looking into history. Agricultural support—more specifically, support for farmers and the development of agricultural produce for the export market—was arguably an early driver for the treaty of Rome in 1957. The powerful dynamic between France and Germany, which is also reflected in foreign affairs and defence, demonstrates the strength of those countries’ relationship, which presents major challenges for the review, reform and renewal of the CAP.
The bigger question for us is simply this: what is the purpose of public support for agriculture? That was well covered in the evidence to the committee on 30 November last year, when Alyn Smith MEP said:
“National security is predicated on food security, and that must be our absolute north star in the negotiations.”—[Official Report, Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee, 30 November 2011; c 448.]
The international picture is a crisis in global food price inflation, which has led to food riots in every continent but Europe. Instability in the middle east has hit the price of oil and affected transport and fertiliser costs. The key point is that security of supply is not an issue for the energy markets alone.
Many members have commented on the current CAP budget. Perhaps we would need the Brahan seer to predict the budget, but the Scottish Parliament information centre briefing makes it clear that the budget for each pillar will decrease by around 9 per cent. In his evidence to the committee, George Lyon MEP estimated that the fall will be around 12 per cent compared with the budget for 2006 to 2013.
Although we do not know exactly what will be in the budget, the omens are not good. More than a year ago, even before the euro crisis, the net contributors to the EU—France, Germany, the UK, the Netherlands and Finland—wrote to the President of the European Commission making it clear that the EU budget should remain static in cash terms or decline in real terms over seven years.
As I said in my intervention on the minister, the actual budget for each pillar will depend on the rate of modulation—the transfer of support from pillar 1 to pillar 2. The total modulation this year is 14 per cent, 10 per cent of which is compulsory and 4 per cent voluntary. I thank the minister for making some points about voluntary modulation and co-financing, which is in the Scottish Government’s hands and can affect the level of the budget.
A number of members, including Claire Baker and Rob Gibson, flagged up the changes to pillar 1. I will concentrate on pillar 2 and the rural development programme.
In Scotland, support is paid through the Scotland rural development programme. The new European agricultural fund for rural development will fit into the new common strategic framework. That is also applicable to other funds, such as the European social fund and the European regional development fund.
The support will have to set a clear link to performance and be linked to the six priorities, with 5 per cent being held back for performance reserve. In addition, 25 per cent of the rural development programme will be focused on land management and, quite rightly, the fight against climate change.
The six priorities include enhancing competitiveness, promoting ecosystems and promoting social inclusion and poverty reduction. Pillar 2 has a crucial role to play in supporting and developing the delivery of public goods and services by agriculture but, as a number of members have stated, the UK receives the lowest share of all the EU member states and Scotland has the lowest share of the four countries in the UK.
Whatever the final EU framework, there will be an element of subsidiarity to member states and, of course, devolved Governments. Should there be a status for and recognition of mountains and islands, as the Scottish Crofting Federation has argued? Is there room for sub-programmes in a future SRDP? Could we construct targets to increase the numbers of crofters and small farmers?
Does any member seriously suggest—I do not think that they do—that food production is inherently in conflict with the protection of the environment and climate change mitigation? As William Houstoun from Angus Growers told the committee:
“We are going to need more food, but the arable areas of Scotland have the ability to become more intensive at the same time as becoming more environmentally beneficial”.—[Official Report, Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee, 23 November 2011; c 414.]
I want a future rural development programme that has strong environmental stewardship, works actively to secure biodiversity and manage landscapes and habitats and stresses the needs of people in rural and remote areas.
We all know what the rural development challenges are—distance, remoteness, low population density and lack of access to services—but my greatest concern is the loss of young people from remote and rural areas. The hills and glens are important, but this is more about the character of the people. Rural development needs the people’s intelligence and individuality, but we also need to develop life sciences, create green jobs, form clusters of renewables, stimulate research and development, and link industry with higher education. The acid test for the new CAP and SRDP will be how they deliver for our most fragile and remote rural areas and for the young, the dispossessed and the disadvantaged.
15:50
I will focus my remarks on the Highlands and Islands and the pillar 2 rural development programme.
It is worth pausing the debate for an instant and looking into history. Agricultural support—more specifically, support for farmers and the development of agricultural produce for the export market—was arguably an early driver for the treaty of Rome in 1957. The powerful dynamic between France and Germany, which is also reflected in foreign affairs and defence, demonstrates the strength of those countries’ relationship, which presents major challenges for the review, reform and renewal of the CAP.
The bigger question for us is simply this: what is the purpose of public support for agriculture? That was well covered in the evidence to the committee on 30 November last year, when Alyn Smith MEP said:
“National security is predicated on food security, and that must be our absolute north star in the negotiations.”—[Official Report, Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee, 30 November 2011; c 448.]
The international picture is a crisis in global food price inflation, which has led to food riots in every continent but Europe. Instability in the middle east has hit the price of oil and affected transport and fertiliser costs. The key point is that security of supply is not an issue for the energy markets alone.
Many members have commented on the current CAP budget. Perhaps we would need the Brahan seer to predict the budget, but the Scottish Parliament information centre briefing makes it clear that the budget for each pillar will decrease by around 9 per cent. In his evidence to the committee, George Lyon MEP estimated that the fall will be around 12 per cent compared with the budget for 2006 to 2013.
Although we do not know exactly what will be in the budget, the omens are not good. More than a year ago, even before the euro crisis, the net contributors to the EU—France, Germany, the UK, the Netherlands and Finland—wrote to the President of the European Commission making it clear that the EU budget should remain static in cash terms or decline in real terms over seven years.
As I said in my intervention on the minister, the actual budget for each pillar will depend on the rate of modulation—the transfer of support from pillar 1 to pillar 2. The total modulation this year is 14 per cent, 10 per cent of which is compulsory and 4 per cent voluntary. I thank the minister for making some points about voluntary modulation and co-financing, which is in the Scottish Government’s hands and can affect the level of the budget.
A number of members, including Claire Baker and Rob Gibson, flagged up the changes to pillar 1. I will concentrate on pillar 2 and the rural development programme.
In Scotland, support is paid through the Scotland rural development programme. The new European agricultural fund for rural development will fit into the new common strategic framework. That is also applicable to other funds, such as the European social fund and the European regional development fund.
The support will have to set a clear link to performance and be linked to the six priorities, with 5 per cent being held back for performance reserve. In addition, 25 per cent of the rural development programme will be focused on land management and, quite rightly, the fight against climate change.
The six priorities include enhancing competitiveness, promoting ecosystems and promoting social inclusion and poverty reduction. Pillar 2 has a crucial role to play in supporting and developing the delivery of public goods and services by agriculture but, as a number of members have stated, the UK receives the lowest share of all the EU member states and Scotland has the lowest share of the four countries in the UK.
Whatever the final EU framework, there will be an element of subsidiarity to member states and, of course, devolved Governments. Should there be a status for and recognition of mountains and islands, as the Scottish Crofting Federation has argued? Is there room for sub-programmes in a future SRDP? Could we construct targets to increase the numbers of crofters and small farmers?
Does any member seriously suggest—I do not think that they do—that food production is inherently in conflict with the protection of the environment and climate change mitigation? As William Houstoun from Angus Growers told the committee:
“We are going to need more food, but the arable areas of Scotland have the ability to become more intensive at the same time as becoming more environmentally beneficial”.—[Official Report, Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee, 23 November 2011; c 414.]
I want a future rural development programme that has strong environmental stewardship, works actively to secure biodiversity and manage landscapes and habitats and stresses the needs of people in rural and remote areas.
We all know what the rural development challenges are—distance, remoteness, low population density and lack of access to services—but my greatest concern is the loss of young people from remote and rural areas. The hills and glens are important, but this is more about the character of the people. Rural development needs the people’s intelligence and individuality, but we also need to develop life sciences, create green jobs, form clusters of renewables, stimulate research and development, and link industry with higher education. The acid test for the new CAP and SRDP will be how they deliver for our most fragile and remote rural areas and for the young, the dispossessed and the disadvantaged.
15:50
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Tricia Marwick)
NPA
The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-01679, in the name of Rob Gibson, on the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee’s scruti...
Rob Gibson (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
SNP
The common agricultural policy proposals that are to be set in place by January 2014 must be made to be good for Scotland’s highly successful food and drink ...
Alex Fergusson (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Con
Does the convener agree that there is also a need to create a year-on-year national reserve, so that people who enter farming after the base year are able to...
Rob Gibson
SNP
We do, indeed, believe that a national reserve is very important.Stakeholders were concerned about the trigger for eligibility for payments, and the new entr...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Elaine Smith)
Lab
I call Richard Lochhead, who has a tight nine minutes.15:17
The Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment (Richard Lochhead)
SNP
I am delighted to speak on the future of the common agricultural policy. I thank the committee for bringing this important debate to Parliament.This is a cru...
David Stewart (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Lab
I warned the cabinet secretary that I have a brief point to make. What are his views on what the voluntary modulation rate and the rate of co-financing will ...
Richard Lochhead
SNP
I thank the member for the notice that he gave me just before I sat down. He raises an important issue. On co-financing and pillar 2 of rural development fun...
Tavish Scott (Shetland Islands) (LD)
LD
The roadshow that his officials conducted in Shetland was extremely helpful, but the statement that there would be little or no change to the bureaucratic im...
Richard Lochhead
SNP
Tavish Scott raises a very good point. The only bit of good news that I have on that point is that all member states across Europe share his concern. I hope ...
John Scott (Ayr) (Con)
Con
Will the cabinet secretary give way?
Richard Lochhead
SNP
I apologise to Mr Scott for not giving way, but I am running out of time.Future CAP processes must be simpler for farmers and Government alike, with regulato...
Claire Baker (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Lab
I am pleased to open for Labour in the debate.I welcome the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee’s work in considering the CAP reform prop...
The Deputy Presiding Officer
Lab
You should begin to conclude.
Claire Baker
Lab
I have only one paragraph left, Presiding Officer.Such a cut would be very difficult for Scottish farming and would make it very difficult for the CAP to del...
Alex Fergusson (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Con
I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests.The backdrop to the debate is interesting in that, until recently, the typical reaction fro...
The Deputy Presiding Officer
Lab
We now turn to the open debate. Speeches are of six minutes, but as we are very tight for time, it would be appreciated if members were able to make their co...
Aileen McLeod (South Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
As a member of the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee, and as a South Scotland list MSP who represents a large rural and farming communi...
The Deputy Presiding Officer
Lab
I reiterate to members how short of time we are and that we will not be able to get everyone into the debate if members take more than six minutes. I therefo...
David Stewart (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Lab
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate on the common agricultural policy. I congratulate Rob Gibson and the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and...
Graeme Dey (Angus South) (SNP)
SNP
As is Alex Fergusson—his recent departure from the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee has deprived the committee of a valued and conside...
Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Con
Last week, I remarked on how unusual it was to have a committee debate before a report had been published. That worked well in last week’s Education and Cult...
Jean Urquhart (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
SNP
Farming and rural communities will welcome the programme of meetings that are being held across the country, and the invitation to submit recommendations. It...
Jim Hume (South Scotland) (LD)
LD
I thank the clerks and the Scottish Parliament information centre for their hard work on the subject and on the many other subjects that the Rural Affairs, C...
Mike MacKenzie (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
SNP
Presiding Officer, I have a confession to make: I cannot pretend to understand properly the common agricultural policy, some of which is mind-boggling in its...
Alex Fergusson
Con
I am sorry to interrupt a very good speech. Does Mike MacKenzie accept that the door of DEFRA is, as I understand it, open to the cabinet secretary, just as ...
Mike MacKenzie
SNP
I am delighted to take Alex Fergusson’s assurance that the door is now open, although I am sure that he would agree that there have been occasions in the pas...
Jim Hume
LD
Is Mike MacKenzie just picking numbers out of the blue?
Mike MacKenzie
SNP
I understand that the number of MEPs would be in the region of 20. Of course, that will be a matter to be decided when the great day comes. I look forward to...
Elaine Murray (Dumfriesshire) (Lab)
Lab
Having recently left the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee, I would like to start by saying how much I enjoyed serving on that committe...