Seòmar agus comataidhean

I am not aware of goods being shipped around the world, and the intention is to prevent the disposal of goods, not their re-export. Do any of the officials want to come in on that?

Of course. I am familiar with the work of the Remakery, as I was a board member for a brief time but resigned that post when I took up my ministerial post. Organisations such as that do much good work, not only in getting goods into the hands of people who could really use them during the cost of living crisis, but in ensuring that nothing is wasted and that materials are put to good use. Part of the route map looks at how we can support such businesses. I am keen for you all to see that draft route map, which will be with you as soon as we can get it to you.

Thank you for taking the time to consider the draft Plant Health (Fees) (Forestry) (Scotland) (Amendment) Regulations 2023. The regulations would amend Scottish legislation in the field of plant health. They introduce provision to extend the duration of an exemption from the requirement to pay fees for phytosanitary certificates for forestry exports from Scotland to Northern Ireland, in certain circumstances, under the UK Government’s movement assistance scheme. That will support Scottish exporters after the transition period and will ensure that Scottish exporters retain access to the same support as their English and Welsh counterparts.

As Northern Ireland remains part of the European Union plant health system, exports from Scotland to Northern Ireland are required to fulfil EU entry requirements, including phytosanitary certificates. The movement assistance scheme, which is funded by the UK Government, temporarily removes the requirement for exporters to pay fees associated with obtaining a phytosanitary certificate for the export of plants and plant products to Northern Ireland. The movement assistance scheme has been extended to June 2025.

The draft regulations also include a minor amendment to the wording of schedule 1 of the Plant Health (Fees) (Forestry) (England and Scotland) Regulations 2015 in order to provide greater clarity on the scope of activities that may be carried out in relation to audit inspections by competent authorities of professional operators authorised to issue GB plant passports.

I consider the regulations necessary and appropriate. My officials and I would be happy to take questions from the committee.

The bill is a framework bill, and it allows us to start the journey down the route of imposing charges on single-use plastics, for example. I cannot predict all the items that the Parliament and the Government may wish to impose charges on to get industry to report on the waste and surpluses that it produces. We are looking to start with food waste but, down the line, the Parliament may choose to look at other sectors and industries. The bill is the start of a journey, and each provision provides for taking specific policy actions in line with councils.

I can give you an example of a provision where that would be the case, which is on the reporting of waste and surplus goods. The provision involves putting a burden or obligation on businesses to report on their waste and surpluses. The arrangements for that would need to be developed with businesses. Such reporting is already undertaken voluntarily by many businesses, including Tesco, Hovis, Unilever and IKEA, so there are already industry examples of good practice whereby large businesses report on their waste and surpluses. Tesco has called for all businesses in its industry to do the same.

By engaging with businesses that already undertake that work and with other businesses in that space, we can develop what we think is industry best practice to support them. That is part of the process of introducing that particular provision on reporting on waste. However, I would, of course, be happy to dive into any of the other provisions that you are interested in.

There is great disparity in how our local authorities implement recycling. Some of our local authorities are excellent and have very high recycling rates, whereas some have lower recycling rates, for a variety of reasons.

I think that you are referring largely to the code of practice element of the bill, the purpose of which is to help people to have a standardised experience. One of the wonderful things about, for example, Scandinavian countries is that they have very standardised recycling, which helps the consumer to understand and do the right thing. In Scandinavian countries, whether people are at home, at work or at the train station, they have the same colour bins for paper, for plastics and for food waste. That standardisation helps with, for example, communication and helps to get the recycling level up.

As part of the co-design process, we might—with councils—develop that standard across the country, so that the user experiences it in a better and easier way. At the moment, some councils collect glass, and some do not. Some councils have different colours and symbols. Standardising that across the country, if that is what the co-design process develops, would make councils’ lives easier. It could also open up opportunities for the bulk purchasing of bins or other savings that might be useful to councils. The whole intention of the co-design process is to make life easier for councils and for them to have input. We all recognise that different communities have different geographic and housing stock challenges. We need to take all of that into account during the co-design process, which is why the councils need to be involved at every step.

The bill certainly looks ahead. In no way are we standing still. At the moment, local authorities are doing a lot of work. There is a voluntary code of practice in place for Scottish local authorities. Every local authority has signed up to reach a certain standard of recycling, but at present, only a third of local authorities adhere to that standard. Our local authorities are already on a journey. They already have a destination that they are trying to reach. The bill puts in place provisions for the next step beyond that.

Local authorities know where they are going to meet the existing code of practice. There is the recycling improvement fund, which nearly all local authorities have had money from. They are working very hard to move towards the existing standard. The bill is the very early days of looking ahead at the next stage and bringing recycling, waste management and resource management in Scotland up to a European standard, and more in line with what Wales is doing.

Councils know where they are in the near term; the bill simply represents the starting line for the next step. That is why the co-design process is so important. It will mean that the work on all the stuff in the bill will be able to start, and we can get into detailed conversations so that the councils will be ready for each of the specific provisions—whether on charging for coffee cups or implementing new powers for enforcement around littering—as they come forward.

I understand the challenge that the committee has in scrutinising a bill that has so many provisions in it, and I am happy to dive into any particular provision that you would like to look at.

The discrepancy is in understanding the difference between a framework bill and the provisions that will follow from that framework.

Where we need to end up and the outcomes are very clear, because they are based on the targets—the circular economy targets, which are national targets, and the targets for local authorities. The vision here is that we know that we need to achieve a certain level of reuse and recycling in order to hit our net zero targets. That involves putting those targets in place and then having a co-design process in which all of us, as a nation and as local authorities, say, “We want to achieve these things. How do we best do that?” That is where the co-design piece comes in. The leadership piece comes in on the targets. We know that we have to hit net zero, and we know that that means achieving certain recycling rates. It is then up to us to work with councils on how we can best do that, because the way in which we do that for a tenement in Edinburgh will look quite different from the way in which we do it on a remote island.

I think that I would give a 10 for the FM, because it is a strategic one. The bill, as a framework bill, is a strategic—