Seòmar agus comataidhean

You have answered my second question, which was going to be about issues between the bridging hotels and the permanent accommodation. I will pass back to the convener.

Thank you, that is helpful.

Apologies. I thought that one of my colleagues was coming in next.

I have a further question, which I will direct to Andrew Morrison. The Scottish Refugee Council has criticised the limitations of the Afghan citizen resettlement scheme and the fact that the UK Government is counting refugees who are already here within the 20,000-person limit. What are your views on eligibility for the scheme? Is there not a real risk that people who should access it will not be able to do so because they cannot apply independently, as a result of the referral requirements? In the light of that, are the numbers that the UK Government is aiming for high enough, or could we take more people than the 20,000 limit?

Yes. I will read the quote out to you:

“we are concerned about the strict limitations around who is eligible to apply for help under this scheme, and that it will leave many thousands of people still at risk of harm in Afghanistan and neighbouring countries.

We are also shocked that the UK government plans to count people who are already in the UK—those who were evacuated from Kabul along with British forces in August—within the 20,000 ‘new’ places offered by the scheme.”

It is about the limitations.

I note that £43 million is going into Scotland’s circular economy in this year’s budget, but I have some concerns about funding that is outwith the Scottish Government’s control. The circular economy investment fund and the resource efficiency programmes are set to finish this budget year, and as far as I am aware there is no plan for how that funding will continue post-EU exit. What impact would a drop-off in funding have on the circular economy and what is the Scottish Government doing to avoid it stalling? What asks of the UK Government have been made in relation to the shared prosperity fund?

My first question is quite general and is for Kirstanne Land and Dr Kerr. The national spatial strategy focuses on different areas in Scotland. What impact will the strategy have on energy production and consumption? Will it support a radical reduction in greenhouse gas emissions? What are the key barriers to delivering the six principles of the strategy? How can promoting and supporting active travel and decentralising energy networks be delivered justly?

Thanks, both—that is useful to know.

That is extremely concerning. You mentioned Zero Waste Scotland. Funding for it has been relatively stable and there is a slight increase on last year. However, we are rapidly approaching the 2025 waste targets across landfill, recycling and food waste. Progress has been slow in some areas—for example, in relation to the 70 per cent recycling target. During the committee’s inquiry, we have heard from local authorities that there are difficulties in relation to recycling and the circular economy. Last week, we discussed the difficulties that there are even in the private and financial sectors, and the need for more central support and a more cohesive approach. What are the top priorities for public and private investment in the coming year to ensure that we have a chance of meeting the 2025 targets?

My next questions are for Elizabeth Leighton and Morag Watson. Please also pick up on any of my previous points if you would like to.

Do you feel that the priorities that are set out for each of the five areas in the spatial strategy are appropriate, given that all the spatial principles that we have touched on already also apply to those regions? Is there a lack of clarity for the public and private sectors and communities? If so, how should that be overcome?

It was just a short question for confirmation.