The Rural Affairs and Islands Committee is calling for more evidence before backing a vote to allow Less Favoured Area Support Scheme (LFASS) payments to continue under the current rules.

The Holyrood committee heard evidence from the Minister for Agriculture and Connectivity, MSP Jim Fairlie, at a meeting on September 25, where it was expected that the Rural Development (Continuation of Operation) (Miscellaneous Amendment) (Scotland) Regulations 2024 would be passed without issue.

However, MSPs expressed concerns about voting on an issue without fully understanding how the LFASS scheme and other elements of the Scottish Rural Development Programme (SRDP) will change in the coming years. Deputy Conservative leader Rachel Hamilton described the vote as being based on a ‘wing and a prayer', adding that the lack of detail on future payment arrangements prevented the ability to ‘scrutinise in a wholesome and fulsome way’.

MORE NEWS | Rewilding company puts three Scottish estates up for sale

A Holyrood committee is debating LFASS paymentsA Holyrood committee is debating LFASS payments The stakes for the rural economy are high, as government officials and Mr Fairlie explained that the motion needs to be passed to create the legal framework for all SRDP payments, which include LFASS, from 2025 to 2030. According to the Scottish Government, the extension to the SRDP and other rural support schemes will ensure stability for the agriculture sector while it rolls out its new approach to agricultural policy through powers established in the Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Act 2024.

Highlands MSP Emma Roddick commented: “It feels like we are taking a lot on faith if we agree right now to freeze things until 2030. LFASS is already based on historic data. We have all been contacted by people who are concerned about that. While I appreciate the need to avoid a cliff edge, we need a bit more clarity on what the options are and how we can influence and scrutinise them.”

In response, Mr Fairlie stressed that payments are highly unlikely to remain static until 2030, as schemes such as LFASS are due for replacement through the government’s upcoming co-designed agricultural legislation. Criticism has also come from some in the industry, arguing that passing the motion would reduce the chances of rebasing payments, which are currently paid based on historic livestock stocking rates. Claimants who have increased or decreased their stocking may find that their payment rate does not accurately reflect their current situation.

One written response to the committee’s call for evidence came from William Moses, an LFA farmer near Newton Stewart. Mr Moses told the Scottish Farmer: “It is outrageous that this government, and their agents, actively choose to prevent equitable support for the next generation of Scotland’s hill farmers, the two sectors the cabinet secretary is on record stating need support most of all. This is nothing more than an amateurish copy-and-paste method of policy making, bizarrely claimed to be co-designed with industry."

The committee will formally consider backing the motion on Wednesday, October 9 with the new evidence.