Minister in testy exchanges with committee convener over farm funding

The convener of Holyrood’s Rural Affairs Committee has clashed with the minister in charge of Scotland’s agriculture over funding for the sector.

Conservative MSP Finlay Carson questioned Rural Affairs Secretary Mairi Gougeon on Wednesday during her appearance before the committee to discuss her remit in the role.

During testy exchanges, the pair initially clashed over a £33 million saving that had been taken from the rural affairs allocation to balance last year’s budget, with promises from the then deputy first minister that the cash would be returned.

Asked by Tory MSP Rachael Hamilton when the money will be returned, Ms Gougeon said she could not give a “definitive timetable” but said the funding is “ring fenced” – meaning it will have to come back to the rural affairs allocation and she will continue discussions with current Deputy First Minister Shona Robison.

Mr Carson claimed the money was “taken out of the budget to be spent on something else” – an assertion rejected by the Scottish Government’s director of agriculture and rural economy, George Burgess.

The exchange escalated when Mr Carson pressed the minister on how much funding she wants from the UK Treasury for agriculture going forward, culminating in the convener accusing her of hypocrisy.

The sector currently receives £620 million from Westminster, with NFU Scotland head of rural policy Jonnie Hall saying farmers “absolutely rely on that” in a previous meeting of the committee.

Ms Gougeon said discussions with the UK Government have not started – claiming the Scottish Government is being “ignored” – but did not say how much money she will be looking for when talks begin, but that she hopes previous promises will continue and any shortfalls as a result of losing EU funding will also be “addressed”.

She added: “We need to have that discussion on allocations, we need to go through that in detail.

“We need to discuss that with the UK Government, I can’t set out in committee today a definitive figure because we need to have the discussions on how these allocations are going to work going forward, but again, we’re not even getting that far.”

Pressed on what the Scottish Government’s “ideal position” is, Mr Burgess said it would not be “the best way to start a negotiation by broadcasting what your starting point and your fallback is”.

Mr Carson responded: “I don’t think the farmers of Scotland will think that’s a good position, they’ll want to have some sort of clarity.”

After a protracted exchange where Ms Gougeon stressed the importance of addressing Brexit-related “shortfalls”, Mr Carson referred back to the earlier exchange on budget, saying: “It’s a little bit hypocritical that you can’t tell us about the £33 million shortfall, never mind any other shortfall.”

In response, Ms Gougeon said: “That’s not hypocritical at all and I think you’re confusing points that aren’t remotely related.”

The clash resulted in two points of order in the committee from SNP members Alasdair Allan and Jim Fairlie – with the latter claiming the former was not adequately addressed – both of which complained about the convener’s use of language.