Hansard

It does not seem so long ago that we were gathered here to discuss the common agricultural policy reform proposals, but it has in fact been more than six months since we last debated the matter. Then, as now, discussion around the detail of the CAP negotiations engaged all sides of the chamber, as we worked towards pinpointing the best outcomes for farmers and for the agricultural sector in Scotland.

As dry and technical as the common agricultural policy can be, it underpins a number of issues of fundamental importance to Scotland’s future, namely the production and sustainability of our food and drink supply, the need to protect the environment for future generations, and the need to maximise the opportunities from all those things in the context of sustainable economic development and the climate change challenge.

Those points were put to me again last week by the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust. The reality is that we need modern agriculture and increased productivity from our farms to meet the demands for feeding our population. However, without due care and attention, large-scale farming can lack the biodiversity that we need to support wildlife, water conservation and carbon storage, as the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust has pointed out. The Parliament also considered such matters of biodiversity when we took time to discuss the consultation document “2020 Challenge for Scotland’s Biodiversity” before the summer recess, so I hope that the same attention is paid to those issues as the Scottish Government begins to implement the finer points of the CAP agreement in future.

A few weeks ago, the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee took evidence from the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment, Richard Lochhead, on a number of issues, including CAP reform. In his opening evidence to the committee, the cabinet secretary was able to highlight some of the potential issues for farmers around the changes to pillar 1 payments, and he has revisited that topic today.

We are talking about reforms of complex subsidies, and the cabinet secretary has highlighted the concerns of farmers from the beef sector about the move from historical payments to area payments and the potential that they may miss out as a result of future changes. Conversely, however, such a move to area payments under the new process would seem to be good for farmers who have previously been sidelined from single farm payments, such as deer farmers. I know that members on all sides of the chamber have assiduously pursued the case for those farmers in the past.

Previously, we expressed concern that the changes to pillar 1 payments coming into force in 2015 would leave some farmers in limbo for the year in between, so it is good to have confirmation that 2014 will be a transitional year, before the changes come into play. The Labour amendment recognises the extremely tight timescale for the introduction of the new payment systems, especially for pillar 1, so it is important that the changes that will come into force are clearly explained to all in the farming communities and beyond, so that we know where we stand.

There will always be tensions between different sections of the same industry when competing for support or funding, but I recognise some of the concerns that have been raised by many bodies, including the National Sheep Association in Scotland, about the uncertainty of the changeover from single farm payments to area payments. I would be grateful if, in closing, the minister could address concerns from hill farmers about potentially huge disparities in payments between lowland arable farms, and hill farms and crofts, under the switch to area payments.

I also look forward to seeing how the Scottish Government will support the new greening requirements being placed on farmers, which are such an integral part of the reforms, given that 30 per cent of the allocation under pillar 1 payments is to be spent on practices that support environmental improvements.

It is interesting, but not surprising, that all the amendments before us, although varying slightly in form and content, seek to revise the section of the motion that makes assumptions about the money that Scotland could have been able to qualify for, had it been an independent member state. We are of course used to the Scottish Government telling us that the grass will be greener on the other side of the independence referendum, but it seems an unnecessarily speculative detail in this debate as it is too dependent on the unresolved issue of what would happen to Scotland’s EU membership post-independence. As I said back in March, it is difficult for farmers to receive direct payments from the European Commission when their Government is still negotiating their country’s accession terms. I would prefer to fix our focus on the realities of the system that we are in.

I am pleased that we are in the final stages of the CAP discussions. As I said before, I hope that we are able, as the Labour amendment suggests, to approach the implementation of the new agreement fairly while maintaining a mature dialogue on this issue.

15:41