SCOTGOV cannot support strategies which are explicitly designed to maintain suckler cow numbers, the head of the Agricultural Department has confirmed.

In a heated debate at Aberdeen Northern Marts, George Burgess, the Scottish Government’s director of agriculture and rural economy, sparred with former NFU Scotland president Jim Walker over beef number promises, where the Galloway beef farmer again accused the department of a desire to cut cow numbers by 30%.

Central to the discussion at Thainstone was the Government’s commitment to the Scottish Beef Sector Strategy 2030 which lists among its key growth objectives ensuring 'that suckler cow numbers do not decrease below 2021 levels – 413,000 as per the June Agricultural Census'.

The chief civil servant said he had not permitted government staff to sign and back the document, which was launched at the Royal Highland Show.

Explaining why the Government had not added its signature to the document, Mr Burgess said: “I didn’t sign off on this because there was a bit that said I will maintain the number of suckler cows. That is what lay behind my Scottish Government colleagues’ names not appearing on the report.”

Mr Burgess stated he wants to see more emphasis on the output from the national herd, not a mandatory obligation to maintain the cows at the current level.

This admission from the senior civil servant sparked fury from fellow panellist Jim Walker, who accused Scottish Government civil servants of demanding a cull of 300,000 Scottish cattle to balance the books on the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions. He said: “There has been a major breakdown of trust between the sector and policy officials. It is an unassailable fact they [Scottish government civil servants] want a 30% cut in cows in Scotland”

That accusation was then directly refuted by Mr Burgess in the debate. But Mr Walker went on to say he had the emails to prove it and is willing to publish them if needed.

Away from that unresolved dispute, the debate heard from SRUC economist Steven Thomson, who talked through the latest developments on farm support plans in Scotland and abroad.

Looking at the, Mr Thomson said they have split their payments into three sections – eco-schemes, coupled payments and direct area support.

Despite the 'C' in CAP standing for common, Mr Thomson highlighted that implementation across the EU was very diverse. Those three sections were not equal thirds, and member states had different approaches. He also stated that chiefs in Brussels have been lambasting national government for not hitting climate or biodiversity targets, to which domestic agricultural ministers have replied that with more money they could make quicker changes – but under the current budget, miracles shouldn’t be expected.

Closer to home Mr Thomson talked the audience through the revolution already happening to England's farm support system. He described it as a 'top-down' approach from Defra, which was wiping out direct payments and replacing them with support for environmental actions. In England, he said, it was going to be difficult for most commercial farms to recoup the loss of historic direct support through Defra's new system.

Northern Ireland was taking a different approach again, according to Mr Thomson. There, the authorities are looking to retain direct support for farmers with a ‘safety net payment’. They are also looking to ramp up the level of coupled support, which would pay farmers for the number of animals or the area of crops they grew. However, to get that cash farmers would need to hit targets, such as calving intervals, and age of slaughter for cattle. The Northern Irish government hope to use this to drive efficiency into the farming sector.

Turning to Scotland, Mr Thomson stated there was a broad commitment to continue to reward active farmers for producing food and looking after the environment, whilst reducing emissions. According to the economist there is to be a focus on three tiers – base payments to support active farming and food producers; enhanced payments for businesses that are highly effective in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and nature restoration; and elective payments for targeted nature restoration and supply chain support.

But greater detail of how these payments will be made after 2025 are still lacking, with a survey to be launched this summer for farmers' views on the way forward. Civil servant Mr Burgess said that, speaking personally, the department was behind where he would like them to be with rural support plans.

Also speaking at the conference was Professor Jude Capper from Harper Adams University in Shropshire. Prof Capper explained the need to reposition red meat in the climate debate and explain the progress being made in the sector to the public.

The academic backed Scotland's push to have farmers get their carbon footprint calculated quickly, so that progress can be measured. If left too late, farmers may not be recognised for the efforts being made at the moment.

She said: “You need to put the line in the sand now to be able to benchmark it because otherwise all the improvements that everyone is doing now won’t be recognised.”