DNA sampling of beef carcases, if implemented correctly and – critically – not too expensive, is a step in the right direction for the sector.

The traceability offered through DNA would go some way to prevent Scotch Beef from being embroiled in food-chain shenanigans. As the Russell Hume investigation highlights, foul play in the food chain causes big-news headlines, which are best avoided.

Nevertheless, costs need to be kept down to ensure unnecessary additional burdens are not placed on a price-sensitive market. We already have the highest-priced beef of the main European producers, so any additional cost will not help our competitiveness.

Furthermore the costs should be targeted at the processor and retailer but, as is so often the case, a proportion of the burden will ultimately fall on the farmer, so it needs to be as light as possible.

Taking DNA samples is already common practice in some abattoirs, particularly those supplying premium retailers or running an Aberdeen Angus scheme.

However, not all our abattoirs supply premium retailers, and we need them all to stay in business. Therefore consideration needs to be given to small and medium-size slaughterhouses when developing the scheme.

Looking further ahead, there are additional benefits from regularly DNA testing carcases. This would help verify the identification of animals and open the door to using tests to match DNA evidence to specific traits we are looking for in our cattle.

Granted, this is some way off – but if we want to be world leaders it’s important to lay the foundations.

Create opportunities not rules

It is a reassuring figure that one in five new leases goes to new entrants, according to the Central Association of Agricultural Valuers and the Scottish Agricultural Arbiters & Valuers Association survey.

This goes to show that if there are opportunities then new farmers have as good a chance to take them on as anyone else. The issue is ensuring opportunities are there in the first place.

We shouldn’t focus on creating complicated rules to guarantee that the small pool of rented land goes to the “right farmer”, but look to freeing up more land for the rental market. You can read more on the survey on page six.

Activity criteria implications

Changes for Basic Payment Scheme claimants who are renting out land could have implications going forward, if there is a further requirement to prove eligibility. Defining these applicants not as productive farmers but as businesses implementing “alternative practices” could be used to focus more funds to active agriculture in future schemes.

While the current changes are more to do with the Scottish Government keeping on the right side of EU auditors, the split in activity criteria could be used to ascertain future eligibility for support.

There could also be tax implications for businesses that are not defined as active farmers. While support money should always follow activity, further moves in this direction need to be made carefully. If rules are too tight, the land market could shut down, which would be a disaster.