���˿���

There will be a division. Please indicate your vote by raising your hand or by putting Y, N or A in the chat box.

For

Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Allan, Dr Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD)

Against

Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)

Abstentions

Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab)

Welcome back, everyone. Under agenda item 5, we will return to taking evidence on the Good Food Nation (Scotland) Bill. Today, we will focus on public bodies. I welcome to the meeting Mike Callaghan, policy manager, Convention of Scottish Local Authorities; Mark Hunter, strategic lead, food and facilities support, East Ayrshire Council; and Jayne Jones, national chair, Assist FM food and drink, Argyll and Bute Council.

Members will note that the bill will place a duty on health boards and local authorities to produce a good food nation plan. The clerks have been unable to secure any witnesses to represent health boards for today’s meeting, which is very disappointing. I have written to all the health boards to invite them to provide written responses to some of the questions that will be posed today. I hope that we can incorporate those responses into our inquiry.

We will now move to questions. We have until approximately 12 o’clock. I will kick off.

What is the witnesses’ understanding of what being a good food nation means? What are your views on whether the bill will enable public authorities to contribute to that ambition?

In NPF3, economic growth and development was a priority. The then Minister for Local Government and Planning, Derek Mackay, suggested that opportunities for altered forestry increased sustainable economic growth, and it led to the Government’s economic strategy. However, this draft of NPF4 does not mention economic growth at all, apart from two times in relation to the national transport strategy. Therefore, it does not appear to have any economic growth strategy. We want to ensure that Scotland optimises opportunities for growth and economic success along with a balance between development and environmental protections. Is that something that has been missed? If not, how have you addressed that in this document?

I thank the minister, cabinet secretary and witnesses for giving evidence this morning. I will suspend the meeting briefly to allow a change of witnesses. We will reconvene at 5 past 10.

Our second item of business is an evidence session on the draft national planning framework 4. I welcome to the meeting Mairi Gougeon, the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and Islands, and Tom Arthur, the Minister for Public Finance, Planning and Community Wealth. They are accompanied by Scottish Government officials: Jill Barber, the head of aquaculture development; Cara Davidson, the branch head of environment and natural resources; Andy Kinnaird, the head of planning transformation; Philip Raines, the head of the rural economy and communities division; and Fiona Simpson, the chief planner.

I invite the cabinet secretary to make a brief opening statement.

Thank you very much for your opening statement. We will now go to questions from members, and I will kick off. A few respondents were concerned about the process for consulting on and finalising NPF4. Indeed, National Trust Scotland said:

“We feel that this limits informed Parliamentary scrutiny of the draft framework by not affording the relevant Committees the opportunity to thoroughly examine a document”.

How has NPF4 been rural proofed? That is not clear. Will NPF4 rise to the challenge of responding to the unique challenges of rural Scotland?

Thank you. That completes our consideration of the affirmative instrument. I thank the cabinet secretary and her officials for attending.

I suspend the meeting briefly to allow for a change of witnesses. We will reconvene at 10.40.

The draft NPF4 was introduced on 10 November 2021 and Parliament has 120 days to consider it. There was the Christmas break, and we also have the Good Food Nation (Scotland) Bill to consider. Is it reasonable that the committee has such a little time to look at a hugely important document that could have a massive impact in rural areas? That 120-day period is not very much, particularly given the Christmas recess. Is it reasonable to expect the Parliament to scrutinise the framework in that time?

I will ask a more specific question. One of the key policies is a commitment to 20-minute neighbourhoods, but there does not seem to be much for rural and island communities in that context. Are there any plans to look at the critical mass of core services and facilities that a community needs to have, given the unique nature of every island and rural community? Will there be any consideration of the same sort of idea as producing a sustainable community within 20 minutes, but on a rural and island basis?

That is helpful.