Meeting of the Parliament 23 September 2015
Like other members, I very much welcome the debate. It is needed, if for no other reason than that I have never known so many farmers in my part of Scotland who are genuinely wondering what the future holds for them. In some cases, they are wondering whether they have a future in agriculture at all. I do not think that that is just down to the serious drops—tough as they are—in commodity prices, which have affected milk, lamb and cereals in particular, or to other factors such as the exchange rate, which the cabinet secretary mentioned. There is palpable uncertainty about the future.
In recent years, we have grown used to farms changing hands incredibly quickly when they are put on the market. Recently, however, in my part of Scotland, farms have been noticeably slow to sell, if they have sold at all. To me, that is as sure a sign as there can be that all is not well in the sector and that the confidence of recent years no longer exists. What has happened to bring about that change and what, if anything, can we do about it?
I am in no doubt that the biggest single factor has been the move away from a CAP support system that was based on productivity, to one that is based on the area that is farmed. I acknowledge that there was no choice in the matter and that the Scottish Government had an extremely difficult task in delivering the new system. However, with the best will in the world, it is difficult to look back and heap praise on how it was introduced—from the apparent reluctance to model new systems at an early stage, through a pretty inadequate and hideously expensive information technology system that required 50 changes to the guidance between the opening day on 1 March and the extended mid-June deadline for applications, to the current inspection and verification process, the outcome of which we do not know. All that has been to deliver a pillar 1 payment the amount of which will probably remain unknown to those who will receive it until they receive it. That process was never going to instil a great deal of confidence, and it has failed to do so.
I agree with Sarah Boyack that one thing that the cabinet secretary could do that would go some way towards rectifying the situation is ensure that the basic payment is paid fully in December, which is what all the amendments seek. The motion says that the Government will make the payments
“as soon as it is able to do so”,
and the cabinet secretary has hinted at interim payments—I understand that more was said about those at the Public Audit Committee this morning. However, the fact is that Governments are elected to make things happen. The CAP support system is the sole responsibility of the cabinet secretary, and the measure of his grip on it will be basic payments being made to all primary producers from day 1 of the December window. He can, and I believe he should, make that happen.
The motion also makes much of what the Scottish Government thinks the UK Government should do—no surprise there—but does very little to suggest anything positive that the Scottish Government can do in bringing back confidence to the sector. Maybe that is no surprise, considering that one of the cabinet secretary’s latest actions—the banning of genetically modified crops—has provoked a pretty adverse reaction not just from the farming sector, but from the science sector. I appreciate that there will be different opinions about the issue around the chamber, but it almost defies belief that a Government that never misses an opportunity to back up any controversial proposal by assuring us that it is acting on the best available scientific advice has not bothered to seek such advice in this instance. Instead, the cabinet secretary talks about protecting the purity and quality of Scottish produce by banning the growing of GM crops; yet, he is denying any potential to grow those crops without the use of chemical pesticides and fungicides that are in common use today. Plant and animal breeding and cross-breeding have been going on since time immemorial, and GM technology is really just an extension of that science.