Felly, can I remind members of the Covid-related measures that are in place and that face coverings should be worn when moving around the chamber and across the Holyrood campus? The first item of business is portfolio. The point of order, Megan Gallacher. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I seek your guidance. Yesterday, during the debate on ambulances, Mr Fulton MacGregor stated the following. The local authority in North Lanarkshire is made up of our Labour-Tory coalition. I am a serving councillor in North Lanarkshire. There is no coalition, unlike here, where there is a formal agreement between the SNP and the Greens. The Conservatives in North Lanarkshire Council will work with any party for the benefit of the people in North Lanarkshire. Mr MacGregor knows well all I have just said. He must be aware that he is guilty of misrepresenting the facts. Members of the public expect elected members to be factual when making contributions inside and outside of the chamber. Therefore, I would be grateful for your guidance on how the official report can be corrected at the earliest opportunity. I thank the member for advance notice of her point of order, but, as she will be aware, I am not responsible for the accuracy of members' contributions in the chamber. Although the point of order mechanism has been used to raise questions about the accuracy of contributions, such questions are not, in fact, points of order. Members themselves are responsible for the accuracy of their contributions. It is not a matter for the chair to rule on. However, the member will be aware that a corrections mechanism is available to members, and the guidance on that mechanism sets out the steps that a member should take if they realise that they have provided incorrect information, as well as the steps to take if they consider that another member has provided incorrect information. The first item of business is portfolio questions. The portfolio is rural affairs and islands. I remind members that questions 3 and 5 are grouped together and that I will take any supplementaries on those questions after both have been answered. If a member wishes to request a supplementary question, please press the request-to-speak button or indicate in the chat function by entering the letter R during the relevant question. When it last discussed with the UK Government the impact of Brexit on Scotland's food and drink industry, the impact of Brexit on Scotland's food and drink industry is raised frequently in meetings between the officials of respective Governments. The Scottish Government is clear that the UK Government must make emergency changes to the immigration system in order to combat acute post-EU exit skills and labour shortages. I met the UK Minister of State at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Victoria Prentice, this week to further raise the need for the UK Government to address immediately the disruption and labour shortages caused by EU exit. That follows a similar meeting that the Cabinet Secretary for the Constitution, External Affairs and Culture had with the Secretary of State for Scotland just last week. Rona Mackay I thank you for that answer. My constituency of Strathkelvin and Bearsden has a large number of independent food and drink retailers who are feeling the brunt of Brexit consequences like the rest of Scotland. Does the minister agree with me that the UK Government was warned of those damaging consequences to our world-leading food and drink sector but went ahead with Brexit regardless and it is entirely responsible for the difficulties faced by retailers and consumers today? Rona Mackay Absolutely. The Scottish Government repeatedly warned the UK Government about the damage that would be caused by its hard EU exit and it is really astonishing and completely reckless that this was pursued in the middle of a pandemic. The food and drink sector in Scotland is a major contributor to our economy and in 2018 generated turnover worth around £15 billion and added £5.6 billion in gross value added or GVA. What we see now is that Scottish businesses are being burdened by EU exit red tape, making it harder for our exporters to ship Scottish goods to Northern Ireland and to the rest of the EU. We also saw delays to import checks unilaterally announced last week with no consultation or discussion with devolved administrations and which was met with Anger by Industry, who have been forced to prepare for ever-changing deadlines that put our exporters at a specific disadvantage. The UK Government needs to re-engage in good faith with the EU to find pragmatic solutions to those challenges that are currently facing businesses right across Scotland. Colin Smyth Last week, the cabinet secretary said that plans for a border control post at Cairn Rhine were on hold due to uncertainties over funding, which I thought would have been agreed before the proposal was announced. Can the cabinet secretary tell us what contingency plans will now be put in place if new checks are required from January? Will she give an assurance that no food and drink business transporting goods across the IRC will see additional delays as a result of the decision not to go ahead with the control post? The cabinet secretary makes a point about costs, as if that is something that has been entirely within our control, but that is the nature of the situation that we have found ourselves in when dealing with the UK Government. As I have said, the changes that were announced last week, and we absolutely regret that the UK Government's decision to delay UK border checks was taken without any transparency, without any discussion or warning with the devolved Administrations with whom it directly affects. Of course, we are working on contingency plans in the need because we will have to make import checks at some point. We are considering what our options around that will be and whether we choose to operate something differently to Scotland, rather than wait until the July 2022 deadline, given that the SPS policy is devolved to Scotland. Again, that is another area where we see our Scotland food and drink businesses and our exporters being put at a specific disadvantage because of decisions taken by the UK Government. To ask the Scottish Government when it will begin consulting on any cap on fishing activity in inshore water. A cap on inshore fishing activity is one of the measures outlined in the recent co-operation agreement with the Scottish Green Party. Those measures will help to ensure that Scotland leads the way on marine environmental protection, enhance our reputation for providing quality, sustainable seafood and position us well to deliver a green recovery. Early preparatory work is already underway and we will consult as soon as is practicable. We will of course ensure that all stakeholders are encouraged to take part in that consultation, including our regional inshore fisheries groups. I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. Given the importance of fishing to my constituency, can she say anything about the likely timescales involved or, given assurance that an island's community impact assessment will be carried out before any changes are introduced? The Government will be testing the potential impact of caping activity in inshore waters so that the needs of our island communities are specifically considered. We will be engaging with our island-based regional inshore fisheries groups as well as all other relevant stakeholders throughout the process. Of course, all our assessments will include the relevant statutory ones, including undertaking an islands community impact assessment. Of course, we will look to do that early in the process so that that can help to shape our policy as that develops. I ask the cabinet secretary how the Scottish Government will consider NatureScot's advice regarding the impact of mobile fishing on marl beds and other habitats when establishing this cap on fishing activity in inshore waters. We want to base our decisions based on the best scientific evidence that is available and as part of the process of when we are looking at caping activity in inshore waters, as well as the process of designating highly protected marine areas. We will be engaging and consulting thoroughly throughout the process to make sure that any designations that we make or any decisions that we take in relation to that are based on the best available scientific evidence. I refer to crofting in my register of interest. To ask the Scottish Government for what reason it did not commit to introducing a crofting bill in its programme for government. The programme for government is largely a one-year delivery programme and does not include all of the activity that is planned by government over the full parliamentary period. Therefore, although crofting reform has not been included in the current PFGE, work will be undertaken during this parliamentary term, as stated in our 2021 manifesto. In the programme for government in 2016, the SNP promised to deliver a new crofting bill planned for later in the Parliament. That did not happen. In this year's programme for government, there was no reference at all to a new bill, leading to the Scottish Crofting Federation describing the Government's approach to crofting as jaundiced, given that it failed to deliver what had long been promised. Can the minister confirm whether the SNP-Green Government still intends to introduce a new crofting bill if it will be tabled in this session of Parliament and specifically when will it be tabled? Yes, I can confirm that. As I say, that is what was stated in our manifesto and we fully intend to take that forward and to implement it. I am sure that Mr Cameron, as well as members across the chamber, would understand why we were not able to take that piece of legislation forward in the previous session, as with a number of other pieces of legislation that unfortunately could not proceed because of the work that had to be undertaken in relation to EU exit and because we were also in a pandemic and the impact that that work had on the workings of the Parliament. Again, we committed to that in our manifesto. I have explained why it was not in the PFG, but in relation to the exact timing of that when that will come forward, that is yet to be discussed through Cabinet and for the future legislative programme. Again, we made that commitment on our manifesto and we fully intend to bring that forward. To ask the Scottish Government what steps will be taken over the current parliamentary session to deliver a crofting reform. Cabinet secretary, I would reiterate that our 2021 manifesto contained a commitment to reform the law and develop crofting to create more active crofts. Already through the Crofting Commission's development officers, work has already begun in implementing actions contained in the Scottish Government's national development plan for crofting, including bringing more crofts back into active use. We will continue to modernise crofting reform this parliamentary term and this will be timetabled in due course. I thank the cabinet secretary for her answer and I note also her answer to Donald Cameron. The Scottish Crofting Federation has expressed better disappointment that the Crofting Reform Bill has not been included in the programme for government. Indeed, Donald McKinnon, chair of the Federation, described it as galling that the bill or indeed any crofting-specific actions were not included in the programme. The working group in the bill, which is the voice of crofters and communities, was disbanded when the Government abandoned the process. Will the minister make clear the Government's position on progress of the bill and will she reconvene the group as soon as possible in order to explain to stakeholders her decisions and re-engage on those important issues? I thank the member for that question. I completely understand the frustration that has been expressed. I have met the Scottish Crofting Federation as well as other stakeholders where that has been raised as an issue. I made that commitment then and again in the chamber today that we will follow through on what was in our manifesto, which stated that we will be looking to modernise crofting law. In relation to how that is done or the bodies that will be established to look at that, of course, we will consider all of that when we look to progress and introduce the bill. Thank you, Presiding Officer. In 2014, the Crofting Law Sump report identified 17 high-priority areas. Rec report of 2017 and crofting reinforced those. Those reports proved difficult to action. I have heard what the cabinet secretary said today. Will she give me an assurance that those will be dealt with by the end of 2022, or is she going to further dither and delay like her predecessor did? I completely reject that comment that has just been made by Edward Mountain. It is not dithering delay. Again, I have explained why the legislation couldn't have been taken forward in the previous session of the Parliament, as other pieces of legislation could not be taken forward at the same time. Again, as I have said in previous responses, we will be bringing forward a timetable for that in due course, but we have committed to modernising legislation in relation to crofting in this term of the Parliament. Through a Scottish Land Fund development application, ILA development initiative has secured 264 acres of cornibus forest. There are a range of options being scrutinised from affordable to buy housing to woodland crofts. Can the cabinet secretary outline what support the Scottish Government is currently giving to new entrants to crofting? I would first like to say that the Scottish Government is proud of our crofting heritage and is committed to continuing to invest in crofting. Every year, the Government approves and provides croft businesses with more than £40 million. Alongside the pillar 1-type payments, a range of support is made available through the Croft House Grant, the Crofting Agricultural Grant scheme, the Crofting Cattle Improvement scheme, help with vet bills and access to the farm advisory service, and to give an idea of just some of the sums that have been involved in that. Since 2007, we have approved croft house grant payments of more than £22.8 million, which has helped to build and improve more than 1,055 croft homes. Since 2015, more than £15 million in crofting agricultural grant scheme funding has been approved, which has helped more than 3,000 crofters with their businesses, which is about 85 per cent of all eligible applications that are being approved. Question 4, David Torrance. Mr Torrance, could you please begin your question again, Mr Torrance? To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the UK Government regarding the on-going labour shortages facing Scottish food producers as a result of EU exit. Cabinet Secretary. The decision to leave the EU was, of course, taken against the wishes of the people of Scotland. We are already seeing supply chain pressures in retail and other sectors, which are essential to our economy, that are attributed to the loss of freedom of movement. Scottish ministers have written to the UK Government 19 times requesting meetings and further discussions on the impact of the UK Government's point-based immigration system in Scotland with little meaningful response. Subsequently, myself and my fellow cabinet members have written to the UK Government to highlight the impacts of existing labour and skill shortages on the food and drink industry, asking for immediate action. As recently as last week, the Cabinet Secretary for the Constitution, External Affairs and Culture met with the Secretary of State for Scotland, further emphasising how issues with the UK immigration system have exacerbated skill shortages in Scotland. Thank you, cabinet secretary. Can I please ask that conversations do not continue in the chamber when the cabinet secretary is responding? Thank you very much. David Torrance Thank you, Presiding Officer. On-farm labour and haulage driver shortages are leaving Brooklyn and Cull for our growers for losses of between 10,000 and 90,000 every day. A recent comment from the managing director of the five-based East of Scotland growers highlighted the emotion told that the on-going labour shortages are taking on Scotland's food producers. Does the cabinet secretary agree with me that the UK Government must, at the moment, be taking all measures necessary to ensure that the sector is able to get employees that it desperately needs? I absolutely do, because it is a heartbreak and shocking that so much food, good food, is going to waste and it just should not be happening. The figures that we have seen from East of Scotland growers are absolutely staggering and I absolutely sympathise with the businesses involved. I think that that just goes to further demonstrate the disastrous effect that the EU has had on Scotland. We will continue to liaise with producers and their trade bodies to mitigate those effects where we can, but it should not be the responsibility of the Scottish Government to continually mitigate and mop up the mess that has been left by the UK Government's bad decisions. We see that happening time and time again whether it is our food and drink industry, whether it is our social security or in other areas, too. We deserve better in Scotland, we can do better and we need the levers of power to enable that to happen. As the Scottish Government, when it expects the agricultural reform implementation oversight board to publish its recommendations on future agricultural policy in Scotland? On 13 September, I co-chaired the first meeting of the Agriculture Reform Implementation Oversight Board. The board is committed to working at pace to agree a national test programme of funded measures to assist in reducing livestock emissions by COP26. That package, based on the recommendations of the farmer-led groups, should be implemented by spring next year. In the longer term, we expect the board to support the work to bring forward new agricultural support system. In particular, the work of the board will support a consultation next year to inform the introduction of a Scottish Agriculture Bill in 2023. I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. Obviously, the board's establishment is welcome if long overdue and the NFU Scotland president did indeed say that time for talk is over and now is the time to deliver. Farmers in Orkney and across Scotland urgently need clarity on future funding and regulation to be able to plan ahead, but they also need reassurance that this will reflect circumstances in different parts of the country. Can the cabinet secretary confirm that the board will be tasked with ensuring that any policy changes reflect specific needs of island farmers and crofters? Can she also guarantee that on-going support for new entrants will form part of the new regime? I am happy to give the member the reassurance that he is looking for on that. That is exactly why the implementation oversight board is established in the way that it has been. The geographical representation of that is considered to be vitally important as well, ensuring that we have representation from the different geographies of Scotland, from the different land types of Scotland. Of course, any considerations in relation to our islands and other parts of Scotland will be taken into account and will factor into that process as well. We have also committed in our manifesto to look at a new scheme for new entrants, so again I would give that commitment. I call Rachel Hamilton. Cabinet secretary, the clock is ticking and rural Scotland is losing patience with this SNP Government. After numerous boards and working groups, your Government has failed to publish the farming and food production future policy group report and give clarity to the replacement of agri-environment climate schemes. Farmers need answers now, so when will this Parliament actually see the first draft of the new agricultural bill? In relation to the member's question, we established the board to drive forward and to deliver the recommendations of the farmer-led groups. That is what it was established to do. We have had the first meeting of that group where it was positive. Everybody on it is looking to do exactly the same thing. We have set out the ambitious timeframes by which we expect to deliver a package of recommendations instead of the timeframes for when we look to deliver that, so we are very much getting on with that job and delivering on what we set out in our manifesto and delivering for agriculture in Scotland. To ask the Scottish Government whether it plans to ban the use of snares to capture wild animals. We currently have the most robust legislation in the whole of the UK to regulate the use of snares. However, I do understand the concerns and why some people would wish to see them banned on animal welfare grounds. Snares is reviewed every five years under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, and the next review is due to be completed by the end of this year. I will consider recommendations from the review and take further action if necessary. One kind of league against cruel sports and the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals has continued the call for an outright ban and the use of snares in capturing wild animals. I would argue that your action is imperative. Britain is only one of five European countries where using snares is still permitted, our cake is indiscriminate and cruel. I ask the minister why banning the use of snares is not specifically listed under the review of animal welfare legislation if the Government is so committed to welfare legislation for animals as they claim. As I have set out the terms on which snares are reviewed are set out in legislation, the Wildlife and Countryside Act. That requires reviews to look at conditions around identification, the regularity with which snares are checked and record keeping. However, as I said, I am listening to the concerns of those who would like to see them banned on animal welfare grounds. I will consider whether this year's review should look at other aspects. I would be happy to engage with the member on that. In light of the recent RSPB report that put the UK at the bottom of the G7 league table for how much biodiversity it has left, it noted that Scotland had the highest level of biodiversity in tachness of all nations in the UK. Does the cabinet secretary agree with me that the Scottish Government can be rightly proud of its comprehensive efforts since 2007 to protect Scotland's wildlife? That Scotland should be ranked highest of the UK nations for biodiversity in tachness. However, we know and have already been clear that there is a lot of work that still needs to be done. Our December 2020 statement of intent set out our ambitions on biodiversity. That included a commitment to increase the area of Scotland's land protected for nature to 30 per cent. We are also leading the Edinburgh process as part of COP 15, and we will set out an updated biodiversity strategy in autumn 2022. Does the minister recognise that snaring is a vitally important land management tool that effectively enables land managers to protect livestock and ground-nesting birds, particularly in scenarios in which other methods of control such as shooting are not practicable? Can I ask the minister what her preferred method of control is? I thank the member for that question. I do not personally have a preferred method of control. What I do recognise is that, as with all matters to do with animal welfare and wildlife and land management on the other side, we need to take a balanced approach. As I have set out, we will undergo the review as part of the statutory rules under the country side act. I will consider whether the terms of that are sufficient with regard to the position in Scotland with the use of snares. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide additional financial support for the fruit and vegetable agricultural sector in light of the losses incurred as a result of labour and logistics issues. The position that our vital fruit and vegetable sectors have been put in is a result of UK Government decisions on Brexit. It should be the UK Government that funds the costs of their actions. Without changes from the UK Government, our industries will continue to suffer. Therefore, we will continue to make representations to them. We will work with stakeholders to explore ways to look at always in which we can help the situation. As I stated in previous responses, the Cabinet Secretary for the Constitution met the Secretary of State for Scotland on 16 September to further raise the need for the UK Government to address immediately the disruption and labour shortages caused by Brexit. I met the DEFRA minister, Victoria Prentis, together with other devolved Administrations to discuss those same issues, because that is critical for all nations. Willie Rennie I heard the minister's answers earlier and I understand the frustration about the reckless actions of the Conservative Government, but this sector is really important for the Scottish economy. It is important that the Scottish Government does do all that possibly can. I have heard a hint from the minister there that she is prepared to consider financial support. I welcome that, because it is important that we keep the capacity in this sector strong if the sector is going to double by 2030. I hear a little bit more. Is she going to provide financial assistance? I would come back to what I said to Mr Rennie in my opening response. We work closely with industry anyway and we would look to try and help and assist in whatever way we can, but right now the most critical issue is labour. That is a problem that we need to solve. We have contacted the UK Government on a number of occasions and hope to try to address that, but met with very little response and had very little engagement from them. The Scottish Government should not have to continually clean up the mess that has been made by the poor decisions of the UK Government, and it should be up to them to compensate and make up for the losses that have been suffered as a result of their decision making. Again, we will continue to do what we can within the powers that we have to assist industry. I understand that I have a point of order online from Edward Mountain. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Today and yesterday have proved incredibly difficult to follow the Parliament on the BlueJeans app, because it does not appear to work properly. It failed significantly this morning during the standards procedures and public appointments committee, and I was only in a position to hear 40 per cent of the questions and answers given today. Indeed, I did not hear the answer to the question that I have raised. I wonder if, Presiding Officer, you could help those of us who are unable to attend Parliament in person to follow the Parliament by making sure that the technology that we have works for us, because at the moment I regret to say that it is not. Thank you, Mr Mountain. I am obliged that you have shared the difficulties that you have been experiencing with me, and I will certainly ask for a review of the circumstances that are causing those technological difficulties. We will certainly take that away and treat it with the utmost seriousness, and we will report to the member in due course. That concludes portfolio questions.