Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 26 April 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2643 contributions

|

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Deposit Return Scheme

Meeting date: 28 March 2023

Mark Ruskell

Maybe we could wind back a bit. There have been a lot of concerns among certain businesses. You have addressed some of those, but what do you see as the outstanding concerns?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Electricity Infrastructure Inquiry

Meeting date: 28 March 2023

Mark Ruskell

On the TNUOS review, is it accepted that the locational signals need to change? As far as I can see, the aim with locational signalling at the moment is to build as much generation as possible as close as possible to the theoretical centre of the GB energy market, which I think is Warwick. Last time I looked, building renewable energy close to Warwick was not going to produce as big an efficiency and load factor as building renewables in Scotland. We get more energy out of wind farms in Scotland than we would in the midlands of England. Is it recognised that locational signals need to change now through TNUOS, and that we need to be accessing and developing the resource where it is?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 28 March 2023

Mark Ruskell

It is good to see you in front of the committee, minister. I will turn to some of the concerns of environmental stakeholders and how you have addressed those in discussions within the common framework process and come to the decisions that you have, collectively. One of those concerns is around divergence during this delay period.

I understand that the EU is considering, and has taken the first steps towards, phasing out 47 groups of chemicals under its regime but that, under the UK REACH scheme, the UK is considering only three groups in that first phase of considering the environmental health impact of chemicals and how quickly they can be phased out. Do you see the potential for divergence, given the deadlines and the lack of pace of the UK scheme?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 28 March 2023

Mark Ruskell

Thanks for that. I have another couple of questions on this.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Deposit Return Scheme

Meeting date: 28 March 2023

Mark Ruskell

That is one area. Are there others?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Deposit Return Scheme

Meeting date: 28 March 2023

Mark Ruskell

But—[Inaudible.]

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Deposit Return Scheme

Meeting date: 28 March 2023

Mark Ruskell

As you said, it is a transitionary period, which is par for the course with many other DRS schemes. However, if there was a grace period for small producers in the middle of that, what complexity would it cause? For example, if some small distilleries are in the scheme and some are not, a convenience store might have a complex shelf of regional whiskies, with some being in the scheme and some being out of it. How will that work? I appreciate Mr Harris’s point that larger retailers might just say, “Forget this—it’s too much”. What other issues might the grace period create for small producers and those in retail and wholesale?

Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee

Devolution Post-EU

Meeting date: 23 March 2023

Mark Ruskell

Do you feel that, with common frameworks, there is potentially a shift towards more executive power and less transparency? I am speaking in general terms about how common frameworks have operated up to now, particularly in areas that were previously European Union competencies, where there might have been more stakeholder engagement and long processes of policy formulation, whereas now that is potentially more of an area for decisions to be made between Governments.

Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee

Devolution Post-EU

Meeting date: 23 March 2023

Mark Ruskell

I will stay on that issue of internal market act exemptions. Evidence that has been taken in other committees in Parliament has suggested that the discussion under the common framework on deposit return schemes has been on-going for a long time. To what extent should that whole process be codified and made more transparent, so that all Parliaments could see exactly what the nature of those discussions has been, or would that impact in some way on the nature of the common framework? The common framework seems to be led largely by civil servants. There is ministerial engagement within that, but it is a very evidence-based process. Would a codification of that exemption process have an impact on common frameworks?

Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee

Devolution Post-EU

Meeting date: 23 March 2023

Mark Ruskell

Okay. My last question is about an area on which we have taken quite a lot of evidence, and that is retained EU law. You might have general comments to make on the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill but, specifically within your area of expertise in human rights, are there any potential unintended, or even intended, consequences as a result of the proposed law and the 23 December cliff edge?