-

Leis gum bi na thig aontachadh aig a’ cheann thall an urra ri dearbhadh càite an tig £800 millean sa bhliadhna a chosg, cha bheag a’ bhuaidh a bhios aige.

Ach, tha e cudromach ann an seagh gu math nas motha na dìreach dèanamh cinnteach g’ eil na sgillinnean air an cosg gu cothromach.

Tha sgìrean dùthchail na h-Alba a’ crochadh air dè na toraidhean a bhios aig na còmhraidhean seo sna seachdainean is na mìosan air thoiseach.

An tig cuideam a chur air an àrainneachd a thoiseach air a bhith dìreach ag àrach bidhe, no measgachadh ciallach dhen dà rud – rud a ghabhas a dhèanamh agus gu deimhinne, a bu chòir a bhith mar amas?

Chan e taghadh a tha seo eadar an dà rud, bhon a tha gach taobh an eisimeil a chèile, tòrr na bu mhotha na bheireadh cuid a chreid'.

Cha ghabh nithean adhartach a dhèanamh timcheall fearann agus na h-àrainneachd as aonais dhaoine a bhith air an talamh airson sin a stiùireadh agus aig an aon àm, tha an sluagh a’ sireadh dhòighean-obrach àiteachais a bheir lùghdachadh air na thathas a’ cleachdadh de charbon.

Tha muinntir an àiteachais glè cheart a bhith ag ràdh ma thig lùghdachadh mòr air na thathas ag àrach de bhiadh anns an dùthaich seo, feumar a bhith cus nas motha an urra ri dùthchannan eile agus chan eil sin ach a’ gluasad buaidh a’ charboin a dh’aiteigin eile – cha choilean e càil agus ‘s ann a nì e cùisean nas miosa.

Aig an aon àm, tha barrachd is barrachd a’ gabhail ris gum feumar dòighean-obrach àiteachais atharrachadh (a dhol air ais chun an t-sean t-siostaim far an robh measgachadh de rudan air an aon fhearann, glasraich agus stoc) gus nach bithear an urra cho mòr ri todhar ceimeigeach is puinnsean, rud a tha a’ dèanamh ciall, chan ann a-mhàin bho thaobh na h-àrainneachd dheth ach, taing do Putin, taobh cosgais.

‘S e na thachair le bhòt Brexit agus gum feumar cùlaibh a chur ri Poileasaidh Choitcheann an Àiteachais as coireach gu bheil sinn a’ faighinn Bile ùr an-dràsta le Riaghaltas na h-Alba, ach tha e a’ tighinn aig àm freagarrach agus an gnìomhachas aig crois-rathaid.

Tha an ùidh a chaidh a shealltainn anns a' chruinneachadh taobh a-muigh na Pàrlamaid Diciadain, a chaidh a chumail le Aonadh nan Tuathanach, agus an tachartas eile a bh’ ann an t-seachdain roimhe le croitearan is eile, a’ sealltainn g’ eil co-dhiù tuigse a choireigin ann am measg nam ball-pàrlamaid agus an luchd-obrach aca.

Chunnaic sinn ron a seo g’ eil comas aig Pàrlamaid na h-Alba dèiligeadh ri cùisean tomadach, gu sònraichte an casg smocaidh agus bho chionn ghoirid, an t-achd ann a bhith ag atharrachadh gnè. Ged a bha sin gu math connspaideach agus duilich, sheall e gun urrainn dhan Phàrlamaid gnothaichean toinnte a làimhseachadh.

Tha na tuathanaich is na croitearan air bhioran a’ feitheamh ri stiùireadh cinnteach bhon luchd-poileataigs, seach faclan faoin, agus tha an t-am a-nis air a thighinn airson sin.

Ann am prionnsabal, bu chòir gun gabh an àrainneachd agus àrach bidhe a thoirt còmhla agus slighe ùr a dhealbhadh dha obair àiteachais san duthaich seo, ach cha bhi e furasta agus abair g’ eil mòran a’ crochadh air fhaighinn ceart.

English language version:

Time will tell, of course, but it may be that the last few days will have finally fired the starting gun on meaningful debate over a new Agriculture Bill, which given it will oversee the distribution of £800 million of support on an annual basis can hardly be dismissed as being of marginal interest.

But even though the sum of public money involved is considerable, its importance stretches way beyond the mere fiscal realm.

The future of Scotland’s countryside hangs on the outcome of these talks in the weeks and months ahead and whether the emphasis will end up more on environmental outcomes rather than food production, or some sensible way that manages to combine both, which is perfectly feasible and should be seen as the ultimate aim.

This should not be a binary choice between one or the other as, in actual fact, they are mutually dependent, much so than the extremes on either side would have you believe.

Good environmental outcomes will only come if there are people on the ground able to deliver and manage it in the shape of active farmers and crofters, but equally the sector needs to make significant inroads in reducing carbon output in their working day-to-day practices.

The farming lobby makes the perfectly valid claim that if food production is significantly reduced it will mean more of a reliance on imports, which will simply shift the carbon damage elsewhere: i.e it won’t achieve its intended objective and could actually make matters a good deal worse.

Within the industry itself, there is a growing recognition that a change in farming methods (a return to the principle of mixed rotations with crops and livestock) can significantly reduce dependency on artificial inputs in terms of fertiliser and chemicals, which not only makes sense from an environmental point of view but, thanks to Putin, from a business one, too.

The timing of a new Agriculture Bill was dictated by the Brexit vote and the need to leave behind the Common Agricultural Policy, but its timing is highly fortuitous in that the industry right now stands at a crossroads.

The degree of interest shown in the NFU rally at Holyrood on Wednesday, and the gathering by small-scale producers like crofters the week before, demonstrates there at least a general understanding of the situation.

The Scottish Parliament has risen to the occasion before, namely the ban on smoking in public places and more recently changes to the gender recognition act, which even though controversial and difficult showed that MSPs across the chamber can tackle highly complex issues.

Farmers and crofters are desperate for a clear sense of where MSPs and the government stand.

In theory, both the environment side and food production can be reconciled, but it won’t be easy and there’s a lot hanging on the MSPs and parliament getting it right.