Seòmar agus comataidhean

I am pleased to give evidence to the committee in support of the draft affirmative instrument to amend the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Order 2020. This spring, the United Kingdom emissions trading scheme authority, which is formed of the four UK Administrations, consulted on proposals to further develop the UK ETS, aligning the scheme with our ambitious net zero targets. The authority is still considering the consultation responses regarding proposals on tightening the cap and expanding the scope. We will publish a joint Government response in due course.

However, some of the operational and technical changes to the UK ETS need to come into force by 2023 and therefore the authority published an early joint Government response covering those amendments to the scheme. Together, the amendments will support the proper function of the ETS.

The amendments are contained in the draft affirmative instrument that the committee is considering today and in a negative instrument to be laid later in November. Today’s affirmative instrument will allow flights from Great Britain to Switzerland to be in scope of the UK ETS. That expansion of the scope will be extended to include Northern Ireland at a later date. Switzerland has already amended its ETS to include flights from Switzerland to the UK. The affirmative instrument will ensure a fully reciprocal arrangement that supports our climate objectives.

The instrument also makes minor amendments to the allocation of free allowances in the ETS to reflect the inclusion of the flights within the scheme. The other members of the authority are also going through a similar scrutiny process in their respective Parliaments to ensure that the legislation is consistent across all Administrations.

Ahead of publishing the final Government response to the consultation, we expect the UK ETS authority to publish the common framework agreement setting out how the four Administrations work together to deliver the UK ETS. I will be happy to provide more details on those issues once those have been published.

I am happy to respond to any questions on the affirmative instrument that the committee may have.

The effects have been very small. To some extent it will not make a significant difference. It is worth keeping in mind that, when we were covered by the European Union ETS, those flights were included. The order is simply covering a gap that was left when the UK ETS was introduced. Given that there are only a small number of flights between Scotland and Switzerland, and indeed between Switzerland and the UK as a whole, the overall impact is very small. However, I cannot give you specific data on that.

The details of the bill are still to be published and I do not want to pre-empt what must be agreed through Government and published. However, grouse management is a key aspect of the bill, as is how to balance it with biodiversity challenges. I hope that it will help to provide a more modern framework for grouse management and how that balances with the need to tackle biodiversity loss.

You will need to wait to see what is in the draft bill. I will not pre-empt it. We also need to make sure that when we provide any additional powers, particularly regulatory powers like this, to third-party bodies that we are satisfied that there is the appropriate regulatory function for managing that. For example, powers that are exercised by the police have a stringent range of challenges around them if they are seen to be inappropriately used and so on, in a way that the SSPCA’s powers may not have.

I hope that once you have seen the bill, you will be in a position where you can determine whether the powers that we provide are sufficient or not. We also need to be mindful of the regulatory aspect of providing any additional powers to a third-party body.

Yes. I will ask David Pratt to come in. He will give you a bit more detail on how we will take that forward.

Six public events took place over the course of August. Five of them were in person and one was virtual. I do not know the exact details of the number of responses that we have had, but we received representation looking to extend the consultation period for an additional amount of time to allow other stakeholders to engage in that process, which is why we agreed to an extension of the timeframe.

I am more than happy to ask officials to provide an update on the quantity of feedback that we have received so far and pass that on to the committee, if that would be useful.

No. The extension will not have any impact on the timeframe. It will allow stakeholders a bit more time to make their submissions and representations, but it will not have any material impact on the planned timeline for the legislation.

Nature-based solutions are important and sit alongside aspects such as tackling the biodiversity crisis that we face. Some local authorities will be better provided for in terms of natural assets than others, purely due to geography. How can we make better use of those assets? How do we make them investable propositions? We are already doing work around peatland restoration, additional woodlands and so on. Is there a way in which we can work with local authorities to make better use of existing spaces that are not necessarily playing a role within nature-based solutions? Yes. Some of that is already happening. In my constituency, I can think of work that is being taken forward in the Hallglen area redeveloping an old colliery bing that has now been turned into a nature park to help to support biodiversity and has brought together a whole range of different stakeholders. Some of that work is already happening. Could we do more of it? Yes, I would like to see more of that happening. A big part of that is also local neighbourhoods and communities: how do we make better use of our community assets within a neighbourhood to support nature-based solutions? There is certainly more that we could do in that area.

On an investable proposition, we are taking forward work and looking at how we can make sure that we have what would be viewed as a clear set of principles around any private sector investment in nature-based solutions as an option that some local authorities and others might want to access. We need to do it in a way that is consistent with it being of a high standard and having a clear set of principles before we start opening it up widely to private sector investment.

The review of NPF4 has taken place and an updated NPF4 will be published in the next couple of months. I hope that that will deliver the tools that they believe are necessary to help to support them in delivering nature-based solutions and protecting the nature-based provisions they have in their local area. If local authorities feel that there are particular gaps in the existing planning regulations, I have no doubt that we would be more than willing to look at that, but I certainly want to make sure that local authorities have the necessary powers required to protect nature-based environments in their own local authority areas and also to act to develop areas in their own local authority areas. If there is a particular area that you feel is a gap, I am more than happy for us to take that away and for the planning minister to look at it as part of the NPF4 process. I hope that that is an issue that was flagged up during the review of NPF4—I have no doubt that it was.

We are moving across to forestry. You will be aware that we are reforming the forestry grant scheme to help to deliver our woodland creation targets. That is in part to make sure that the scheme delivers better public value and also helps to support our biodiversity strategy and our community wealth-building programmes. We are also looking to make sure that the scheme is more aligned with helping farmers to understand the benefits that they would gain from growing trees and supporting their farming business—we want to assist them in recognising the value that using part of their farmland for forestry may have to them as a business. Doing that will also help us to achieve our biodiversity and woodland creation targets.

In our land reform bill, we will propose reforms that will hopefully help to address some of the issues that you have highlighted. Overall, on the forestry side, we are trying to take an approach that makes it attractive to farmers and aligns more with their own thinking and helps to support them as businesses in taking forward any forestry support grant that they are provided with.

Donald Henderson might be able to say a bit more about the use of land and how that can be developed to help to support some of our nature-based solutions and tackle biodiversity loss. He may also be able to say a bit more about the forestry grant.