Tim Eagle
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“I do not approach immigration by seeking to divide communities or inflame tensions, as Reform appears to. I seek solutions even when they are difficult or unpopular in parts of this chamber. Victor Currie: Britain is a multiracial country, and people of all backgrounds call this their home.”
“Using thorium, the current stock of nuclear waste could be recycled into new reactors, which presents an opportunity to solve the waste problem once and for all. Does Tim Eagle recognise that we should be at the frontier of those developments and not simply a laggard? Tim Eagle: I absolutely recognise that.”
“We still have no timeline for the Nairn, Elgin or Keith bypasses. When concerns were raised about the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, we led the opposition. When concerns were raised about the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021, we fought the fight. When our fishing industry needed a voice, we were there for it.”
“When others were afraid to discuss welfare reform, we were prepared to have that conversation, not because it is easy but because responsible government requires difficult conversations. When Scotland’s ferries descended into chaos, it was us—the Scottish Conservatives—who continued to relentlessly pursue answers.”
“That is the point: there were good, skilled jobs, which allowed young people to stay in the area, so that they could have crofts and families and build houses.”
“I will try to keep to that, Presiding Officer. It has certainly been an interesting debate to listen to. My colleague Murdo Fraser talked about the word salad of the motion. I was not quite sure what I should zone in on, but I will start with the title, which is “Scotland Needs Reform”.”
The complete record
Every one of 444 lines we hold for Tim Eagle, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 9.
“I had to move the meeting to a different venue; we also had to create a satellite venue, and we still had people who were trying to access it online as well—and OSG did not even turn up. It is not as if the company even gave me a lot of notice—it literally did not turn up the day before, and that is just not on. If you trust your proposals, as Douglas Ross said, you should just come along. We are now in a position in which more than £1.5 million of public funds are being spent despite the widespread local opposition, and despite unresolved questions about whether the facility is actually needed at the scale that has been proposed. The case for the project rests on the claimed need for wet storage for floating offshore wind foundations, but the available figures suggest that that need is far less certain than has been presented.”
“However, people are motivated and really concerned and anxious, and they have come to me in the hundreds. I have a folder in my inbox that is filled with emails from people from across the north-east and the Highlands, all the way to Caithness, who are concerned about the proposals. Douglas Ross got it right when he said that Moray Firth is just not the right location for these proposals: it never was, and they should not go forward. I am, therefore, speaking today not just with my voice, but with a shared voice: a voice for all who have worked on the issue and all who have written to me, because there has been concern from communities about how the project has been handled from the very beginning. As Douglas Ross said, I hosted a public meeting, and I could never have expected that more than 600 people would attend.”
“First, I congratulate Douglas Ross—as both he and Emma Roddick have mentioned, the debate has been a long time coming. We have raised the issue in the Parliament several times, and, in Finlay Carson’s members’ business debate last week, we asked a question on the point that we should not have to wait for an informal application to go in—we need the Government to step in now. I welcome everybody who is up in the public gallery. It is a long route down the A9—I do not know whether they came via Aberdeen or down the A9 today, but I am very conscious that we have held them up a wee bit, so I hope that their bus is going to wait for them for their trip home. I am grateful to them for coming to Parliament, because—as Douglas Ross said—it is not always easy for people who live so far away to come down here.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to increase the number of available beds in Dr Gray’s hospital Elgin and throughout NHS Grampian facilities. (S6O-05492)”
“We still have access to the same number of aerial surveillance hours under the new contract, with the ability to add more, so it does not diminish our capabilities—if anything, they are being enhanced through the use of new technologies, such as drones, as I outlined in discussions on the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill. We are always looking to increase and make improvements to those capabilities, particularly in relation to those vessels. I agree that such capabilities are important. We have a large marine area to cover, and we need to make sure that we have all those aspects in place. Ecological Focus Area Activities (Orkney Agricultural Sector) 5.”
“There is no doubt that marine protection and enforcement are important, but, following the removal of the Airtask Group’s aircraft, which is based at Inverness, I still worry that they have taken a hit. Does the cabinet secretary believe that new vessels, when they come, will ensure that we have in place strong protections and monitoring, given the loss of experience and the speed of response that we once had at Inverness airport? Mairi Gougeon: It is not correct to frame the situation in that way, because what we have are additional capabilities with a lower cost. I need to be clear on that.”
“I want to expand on that—I will make this point again next week. In responding to me about the Moray FLOW-Park, the Government has consistently said that there is no application in yet. That is the excuse; the reason for the Government not saying anything else is because there is no application in. However, community is clearly telling me that we do not want an application to go in. Some £1.83 million of public money is being spent on a project that the community clearly does not feel is in the right place, and the community, councils and various other businesses are saying, “Work with us. We are not saying no, but come and talk to us, and perhaps we can find other locations around the Highlands where you can do this.””
“First, I congratulate Finlay Carson on securing what I think is a very important debate. The first two speakers have been from the south of Scotland, I am here representing the Highlands, and we have members from the north-east and from central Scotland, too. All of us will have received very much the same feedback from our communities. I wish to touch on three areas, the first of which is the Moray FLOW-Park. It will not be a surprise to members that I mention it, as I am actively campaigning on the issue as hard as I possibly can, for good reason. I will go into the subject in more detail in a members’ business debate next week. Last Thursday, I asked the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Action and Energy a question about it, and she seemed slightly annoyed with me about what I was saying.”
“To ask the Scottish Government when the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Action and Energy will meet with campaign groups regarding the Moray FLOW- Park project proposal. (S6O-05479)”
“Deer management is not just an environmental issue; it underpins jobs, sporting activity, tourism and fragile local supply chains. Changes proposed in the bill, when taken alongside the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Act 2024 and the Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Act 2024, have contributed to a growing sense in the rural sector that decisions are being done to them rather than with them and of a Government moving to make big changes in an area that needs time.”
“They have often been well intentioned and carefully drafted, yet too many have failed to halt decline. That failure has not been because of a lack of targets on paper but because of inconsistent political will, fragmented delivery and, in recent years, changes to budgets. Against that backdrop, the Scottish Conservatives do not believe that statutory targets, however well meaning, will succeed where previous approaches have struggled. Targets alone do not restore habitats, support species or rebuild trust—practical, co-operative action on the ground does that. That is why co- operative deer management matters so much. For years, voluntary deer management groups have worked across boundaries, balancing environmental outcomes with animal welfare and the needs of rural economies.”
“I start by reminding members of my entry in the register of members’ interests. At stage 3 of the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill, it is right that we step back and ask not only what this legislation seeks to do but whether it will genuinely deliver better outcomes for nature, communities and those who manage our land. There are parts of the bill on which there was once genuine consensus. The removal of part 2 on protected areas was a clear example of that. That section was taken out, because members across parties recognised that it was not ready, not workable and not supported by those who were expected to deliver it. Scotland is not new to biodiversity plans. We have had strategies, frameworks and action plans stretching back decades.”
“There are existing animal welfare protections in Scottish law, most notably the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006, which already makes it an offence to cause unnecessary suffering to a protected animal and gives ministers powers to set codes of practice and licensing for animal-related activities. Some stakeholders argued that strengthening regulation, licensing and oversight could better protect greyhounds throughout their life cycle, rather than an outright ban that might drive activities underground or simply displace concerns across borders. Animal welfare remains an important priority for me and the Scottish Conservatives. Although I see the motivation behind the bill, because of what I have set out, I am afraid that we cannot support it at stage 1.”
“My understanding is that, during earlier consideration of the issue, the Scottish Government was clear that a ban was not necessary and pointed instead towards regulation and licensing—I am conscious that Jim Fairlie just touched on that—but, during the progress of the bill, that position has changed. It is important for me that legislation of this nature should be driven by clear reasoning and transparency. A properly designed licensing and regulatory framework, which I understand the Government already has powers to introduce, could have gone further in safeguarding the welfare of greyhounds throughout their lives, whether they race in Scotland or elsewhere.”
“Although I note that the committee narrowly supported the general principles of the bill, there were concerns that there was insufficient new evidence to firmly establish the need for a ban. A question also remains for me about proportionality. No licensed greyhound racing is taking place in Scotland, with the last fully licensed track having closed several years ago. That raises a fundamental question: are we legislating to end an activity that already no longer exists and, if so, is a blanket prohibition the best or most proportionate way to address welfare concerns? I also place on record a concern about how we have arrived at this point.”
“I recognise the work that Mark Ruskell MSP has put into the bill and I am genuinely grateful for the discussions that we have had on the issue in recent months. Although I have not been through the member’s bill process myself, I understand that it can be demanding. There is no doubt that the welfare of animals matters deeply to all of us and that the intention behind the bill—to protect greyhounds from harm—comes from genuine concern. However, I have to be honest that I struggle to believe that it is a priority for the Parliament, given the important issues that the people of Scotland look for us to act on. As the stage 1 report from the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee made clear, not all members are convinced that a ban is justified now.”
“My amendment 63 would strengthen the bill by requiring ministers, when setting targets under section 1, to have proper regard to the importance of local food production and domestic food security. It would place a clear duty on ministers to support local food producers and to consider the impacts of targets on Scotland’s future ability to produce food. Importantly, the amendment would help to ensure that environmental targets do not result in a decline in beef and dairy herd numbers or create incentives that encourage a reduction in red meat and dairy consumption. In an increasingly uncertain world, I cannot overstate the importance of protecting Scotland’s food producers. Ensuring that our country can feed itself is not optional—it is a core responsibility of any”
“In beginning what will be, I think, 10 hours or so in the chamber, I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests. As I set out at stage 2, Scotland’s future food security relies on getting the right careful balance. We must ensure that domestic supply can meet demand and that we do not drift into an overreliance on imported food. The vulnerability of our current position was underlined last year by the Scottish Association of Meat Wholesalers, which warned that beef supplies had reached a critical point. Quality Meat Scotland has also been clear that meeting future demand will require more cows and not fewer, estimating that Scotland needs around 80,000 additional animals.”
“I commend the communities of Garmouth and Spey Bay, particularly the Speyside Coffee Roasting Company and the WDC Scottish Dolphin Centre, for their strong support to see the bridge repaired. Meanwhile, Cloddach bridge, which was built in 1905, has stood for more than a century as part of the River Lossie crossing near Birnie in Elgin. It was closed to motor vehicles in February 2022 after inspections showed that its condition had deteriorated to the point at which it could no longer safely carry heavy traffic. Weight restrictions had been progressively tightened over the years before its closure, and it remains open only to pedestrians and cyclists. However, without significant investment to replace or repair it, the bridge risks being lost entirely, with the communities that it serves left divided.”
“It formed part of the historic Moray coast railway and later became an important part of the national cycle network next to the Speyside way. I can guarantee that, the day before, many people, including young children on bikes, would have been crossing it. I am thankful that, at the time when the bridge collapsed, no one was on it. Early engineering inspections suggest that scour soil erosion around the bridge’s foundations—a slow process that undermines even our most enduring bridges—was likely a cause. Some want to play the blame game; I want the bridge fixed. That iconic structure is now closed, with no immediate solution to reopen it, pending specialist inspections and—crucially—funding for either repair or replacement.”
“In truth, this is a debate about connectivity, how we keep communities together and how we ensure that, just because critical infrastructure is getting old and is costly to fix, the Parliament and the Government do not use that as a reason to ignore it. While the subject of bridges might not dominate the evening news, it is absolutely vital to the daily lives of people in rural—and for that matter, urban—Scotland. On 14 December last year, residents of Moray, including me, woke up to what we thought was a joke: artificial intelligence photos of a deeply popular 19th-century iron bridge connecting Spey Bay and Garmouth—the Spey viaduct—torn in two and lying twisted in the river. What seemed unlikely very quickly became reality. It was no joke—a popular bridge was no more.”
“I thank—[Interruption.] The Deputy Presiding Officer: Could we have Mr Eagle’s microphone on, please? Tim Eagle: I will start again, Deputy Presiding Officer—thank you. I thank all those members who will be speaking in the debate. Some might be wondering why, a few months out from a critical election, I am in the chamber talking about bridges. The truth is that each trip that we make, whether we are walking, going by car or on a bus or train, we will probably go over a bridge, often many bridges—sometimes without knowing. While many gaze at the wonder of the Forth bridges as they come into Edinburgh, few probably take a moment to recognise the many road bridges that connect us with our communities every day.”
“Jim Fairlie: Last year, we added an extra £500,000 to the sea eagle management scheme, and we will continue to monitor that. I established the wildlife and land management forum, and discussions are on-going about how we manage the issue. Tim Eagle: They have done nothing. Jim Fairlie: To go back to Ariane Burgess’s point, we need to make space for nature and for people to farm, so we are trying to find the balance for both. [Interruption.] That is why we put the extra £500,000 into the sea eagle management scheme last year, and it is why we are committed to making sure that we work with the sector. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I would be obliged if members, particularly Mr Eagle and Mr Carson, whom I have allowed to ask supplementaries, would not shout from a sedentary position. Combinable Crops (Consultation) 7.”
“Although I recognise the concerns around any possible reintroduction of lynx, will the minister please acknowledge the significant and on-going impacts that sea eagles are already having on farmers and crofters on the west coast of Scotland, in relation to which there has been much discussion but no action? I applaud the minister for not considering the reintroduction of lynx without the clear consent of affected communities, but when will the Government set out what it will do to address the current concerns on the west coast? The lambing season is right around the corner. The Deputy Presiding Officer: That question is not related to lynx, but the minister can make any additional comments. Jim Fairlie: Tim Eagle is talking rubbish, because he said that we have not done anything. Tim Eagle: Tell that to the west coast farmers.”
“Portfolio Question Time Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands 14:07”
“Will you ensure that those of us in the chamber who want to ask a rural question will get selected today, rather than members of the SNP who have not lodged questions? The Deputy Presiding Officer: As I and the Presiding Officer have made clear in the past, when members are picked out of the ballot to ask a question, they should make sure that they are available to do so. I think that it is disappointing to see in the Business Bulletin that a number of questions have not been lodged. I simply reinforce the message that the Presiding Officer has previously put out. She has spoken to the Minister for Parliamentary Business about these specific cases, but all that I can do is emphasise the importance of members taking care, when putting their names into the ballot, to ensure that they will be available to ask questions.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I realise that people want to carry on with rural questions, and please believe that I want to do that, too, as the points that will be raised are critically important. However, I cannot help but rise to speak at this point. Rule 13.7 of the standing orders deals with portfolio questions, the item that we are just coming to. My understanding is that, by convention, when members enter their names into the ballot to be picked to ask a question, they will submit a question. However, today, three SNP members have decided not to lodge their question. There are rows of people on the benches behind me who want to ask a rural question, so I seek your guidance, Presiding Officer.”
“There is real anxiety about crofts being priced beyond the reach of local people and new entrants, and about grazing shares becoming detached from the crofting system. Those are not abstract legal points; they go to the heart of whether crofting remains viable for future generations. We should all give that careful thought as we reach stage 2. One interesting area that came up and that has not been touched on a great deal in the bill is around the ownership of carbon rights and—potentially in the future—biodiversity rights. That also needs to be considered at stage 2 of the bill. The bill is moving things in the right direction, but crofters are clear that it cannot be the final word. I welcome discussion with the minister as we head towards stage 2 and the next phase. 16:16”
“Weak enforcement of residency and cultivation duties has, to some degree, damaged trust in the system and, in some areas, the social fabric of crofting communities. Although the Crofting Commission’s recent efforts are very welcome, crofters want to see such efforts backed by long-term legislative safeguards and proper resourcing, so that duties are applied fairly and consistently. Environmental use of crofts is another area in which balance is crucial. Environmental outcomes can sit alongside crofting, but they must be rooted in active use by real crofters. There is genuine concern that land could be neglected or effectively abandoned under the banner of environmental use, which must be addressed clearly in the legislation. The bill also touches on owner-occupier crofts and common grazings, both of which matter deeply on the ground.”
“I welcome the work that has gone into the bill and the constructive engagement between the Government stakeholders and the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee. Part 1 of the bill makes sensible technical improvements and addresses practical issues that have caused frustration for some time. That progress is important and should be recognised. However, as I have said, many crofters feel that the bill does not yet answer those bigger questions about the future of crofting. After so many years, and with crofting being so ingrained in the way of life of highlanders and islanders, I believe that the Scottish Parliament owes them that wider review in the next parliamentary session. The issue of enforcement has come through strongly in the evidence.”
“When I first read the committee’s draft report, the major point that I wanted to ensure that it contained was a recognition that there is a clear and growing consensus on the need for a full-scale review of crofting legislation. That was picked up by Finlay Carson, and I believe that it was accepted by the minister in his response to the report. Crofters across the Highlands and Islands are looking for that important piece of work—one that properly reflects what crofting means in different places and how it operates in those very different local contexts. There is no doubt that the bill is a step forward, but it also underlines that a deeper and more comprehensive review is now needed.”
“I could not make it down to Edinburgh last week because of the snow in the north. I was trapped at home with my three children, who could not get to school. I want to thank farmers and crofters—I have done so on Facebook, but I want to say it in the chamber even though many others have already—because teachers and doctors live on my road, my wife being one of them, and we could not have got out without their help. I do not blame anything on local authorities, which did their best last week to try to get people out and make the roads as safe as possible, but I thank the farmers and crofters across the Highlands and Islands and the north of Scotland. The Scottish Conservatives will back stage 1 of the crofting bill today.”
“To ask the Scottish Government, regarding its work to support the historic environment, whether it will provide an update on its involvement in the regeneration of Grant Lodge in Elgin. (S6O-05328)”
“That has been a controversial policy, and it has upset several members of the small pelagic fleet in particular. To announce the proposed change on 18 December, a few days before it comes into place on 1 January, is, frankly, outrageous. It is a real shame—”
“It is a real shame that Scottish Labour has not been able to secure the changes that are required, because Scottish fishermen do amazing and often dangerous work in our waters, day in and day out, to bring fresh fish to our communities. I thank them for that, and I wish them all a very merry Christmas. I agree with Alasdair Allan’s points, and I think that we should continue the campaign to make sure that we get a fair part of that funding. However, although Alasdair Allan has eloquently championed the Scottish fishing industry, I must bring up the fact that at 09:09 this morning, he lodged a Government-initiated question, the answer to which—which was issued about an hour and a half later—said that the Government was going to change the economic link requirement for landings figure from 55 per cent to 70 per cent.”
“I thank my colleague Stephen Kerr. This is the season of good will, so I want to end on a happy note, although, sadly, I have one negative point that I will bring up later on. I thank Alasdair Allan for securing this important debate. The issue of Scotland’s share of the fishing and coastal growth fund has been discussed in the chamber before. It is ridiculous that Scotland has not received its fair share of that money. As has been said, the Scottish Government and the Conservatives have made representations about that. I think that I could sum up Alasdair Allan’s speech simply by saying that the Scottish fishing fleet was better off under the Tories, because the Tory Government would never have done this.”
“To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the partial collapse of the Spey viaduct, including what support it can offer to Moray Council in responding to the immediate consequences and the next steps for the local community. (S6F-04537)”
“We heard earlier from Graham Dey, the Minister for Parliamentary Business, that the Scottish Government is taking the issue seriously, but I want to hear that the Government really is doing that and that things will change, because, otherwise, businesses will go under. 18:10”
“I am not opposed to what you are saying, because we must work together to make common sense prevail. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I cannot give you much time back Mr Eagle. Tim Eagle: That is okay, because I am about to finish anyway. A small business that runs bothies emailed me to say that it faces a rates bill rise from £11,000 a year to £31,000 but that nothing has changed at its site that would justify a tripling of rates. Finally, a small self-catering company in the Western Isles—somewhere I am passionate about—told me that it is facing a 209 per cent increase in its rates bill and that, if that goes ahead, the business will have to be wound up. I say that not as a joke but because I genuinely think that it will happen.”
“I wonder what the small businesses that go over the threshold and do not get any small business rates relief will be saying about how sustainable their businesses are. Tim Eagle: I agree with Rachael Hamilton. If we believe in everything that we say about the circular economy and in supporting rural businesses and local economies, we need to support small businesses. They are the root and branch of everything that we do, and we must get behind them. I wanted to raise that point today. Christine Grahame: Will the member take an intervention? Tim Eagle: Yes, although I have almost finished. Christine Grahame: I was tempted to intervene on the intervention. Of course, what happened to the Central Bar is wrong—that is why I am so pleased that there is going to be an inquiry.”
“My inbox has been filled with messages about that issue over the past couple of weeks, and I appreciate people getting in touch with me. I will give a few examples. One small holiday-let business emailed me to say that, when it started its business, in 2020, which was already a tricky year with Covid- 19, its business rates bill was £6,000 a year, and it has just received its draft valuation for 2026, which informed the business that it faces a new bill of £30,000 a year. In its words— Rachael Hamilton: Will the member take an intervention? Tim Eagle: Absolutely. Rachael Hamilton: We are all congratulating businesses. Christine Grahame just congratulated the Central Bar, but a cursory look at the Scottish Assessor Association’s website shows that the Central Bar is facing a rates increase from £13,700 to more than £20,000.”
“They include Kompassion Kombucha, W Reid butchers in Hopeman, and the microbrewery Mind Hop Brewery, which produces Moray’s newest non-alcoholic beer and stout, as well as supporting mental health charities. However, as members might expect me to say, often overlooked are some of our farmers and fishermen, who are themselves small business owners. Many are developing their businesses to support local enterprises, and they are bringing their food to the market in a variety of different and quite innovative ways. I want to recognise the value that they bring to their communities. I will focus on a particular concern that my colleague Fergus Ewing brought up earlier, which is the changes to non-domestic rates.”
“I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests: I am a small farmer in Moray. I join others in thanking Rachael Hamilton for securing a very important debate about the value of small businesses, not just on small business Saturday but across the year, and the value of what they do, particularly in rural communities such as those in Moray, where I live. Although Moray might be home to some of the bigger names such as Walker’s Shortbread, Johnstons of Elgin and Baxters, it is also home to some really promising new starts and growing small businesses. I have had the pleasure of lodging motions to welcome some of their major achievements this year.”
“Part of my response during the debate on that issue was that I want to engage with members—I asked those who are interested to contact me about it. If the member wants to be involved in the conversation on the guidance, he should contact my office and let me know, because I want to make sure that we get the guidance right. I am open to having those discussions with anyone who has an interest in it. Kilpatrick Hills 4.”
“Debates about access rights can often be quite polarised, but the reality is that huge numbers of people access our countryside every year, and it is done remarkably well. However, where conflict occurs, I often find that the landowner is questioned but the responsibility requirements of those accessing the land are not always pushed by local councils. If any update to the guidance is to be done, will the cabinet secretary ensure that the Government takes into account new thinking on what responsible access means? Mairi Gougeon: I appreciate what Tim Eagle says about polarisation and what sometimes happens when we talk about the issue. However, Burntisland is a perfect example of a situation in which all parties from across the chamber came together to recognise that there are significant issues.”
“That is why groups such as Dogs Trust, the Scottish SPCA and other welfare charities have supported stronger recognition of dog theft as a stand-alone offence. They have highlighted the immense emotional impact on owners and the trauma that is experienced when a dog is taken. The bill, as we know now, will create a specific statutory offence of dog theft with appropriate aggravations where an assistance or helper dog is taken, thereby ensuring that offences are treated with the seriousness that I believe that they deserve. I therefore urge all members, whether or not they are dog owners, to support the bill today, so that Scotland can send a clear message that we value the welfare of our dogs and the deep, irreplaceable bond that they share with their owners. 15:28”
“I do not intend to speak for very long today, but I begin by thanking Maurice Golden, whose dedication in introducing this member’s bill and steering it through Parliament has been tireless. His commitment reflects not only his care for animal welfare, but his understanding of the deep bond between people and their dogs. He is right that, for many Scots, dogs are more than pets—they are companions in times of isolation, loyal partners on long walks, and, for people who are living alone or with health challenges, a daily source of emotional support and wellbeing. Research from animal welfare organisations emphasises that dogs can significantly reduce loneliness and improve mental health. Losing a dog to theft is not like losing an object; it is—as the cabinet secretary has just pointed out—like losing a valued and loving family member.”
“When the Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Act 2024 was passed, the SNP promised a five-year rural support plan—a genuine Scottish framework giving farmers, crofters and food producers real certainty about the future. Fast forward to December 2025, and what do we have? There is no rural support plan and we have a change to the Scottish suckler beef support scheme, as the Government failed to get it right the first time. That is now being amended in the SSI after we told the Government to do that. We also have new greening rules before us— [Interruption.] The Presiding Officer: Let us hear Mr Eagle. Tim Eagle: We have umpteen pages of regulation just to get a slice of what used to be simple support.”
“Tonight has shown the shocking state that the Government is in and the desperate need for change. Let me tell members a tale of grand ambitions and puffed-up promises— Members: Oh! Tim Eagle: Members can sigh, but I will go on for a few minutes yet. In actual fact, the Government has delivered a policy so wet that it is turning our farms into bureaucratic bogs. Before us stands a party that once said that it would make Scotland a global leader in sustainable agriculture and that it would support food production, fight climate change and back rural communities. Yes, that is the Scottish National Party—ever the deliverer of words; rarely, if ever, the deliverer of action.”
“There will be a short suspension to allow members to access digital voting. 17:31 Meeting suspended. 17:33 On resuming— The Presiding Officer: We come to the vote on amendment S6M-20068.1, in the name of Douglas Lumsden, which seeks to amend motion S6M- 20068, in the name of Graeme Dey. Members should cast their votes now. The vote is closed.”