Seòmar agus comataidhean

I think that I have got certainty, because trading standards are content at the moment, but my question is inspired by the fact that there are a lot of technical regulations, and we have a lot of expertise in the committee clerking team and the Scottish Parliament information centre team to identify areas where the legislation can potentially be improved.

I will move on. Another thing that we have learned on the committee is what the WEEE regulations are. For anyone who is watching the meeting, I should say that they are the waste electrical and electronic equipment regulations. I also note that a UK-wide vaping product duty will be implemented in 2026. I would like to know about the interaction between the WEEE regulations and other potential fiscal measures in relation to these matters. Take-back schemes are still required in relation to vapes and vaping products, but I understand that compliance with them has been relatively low.

That is the general context. Has the Government thought about the interaction between the WEEE regulations, the forthcoming vaping products duty in 2026 and what we hope to move to legislate on this morning?

Of course—absolutely.

I am delighted that, in a few years, we will be in a position to scrutinise all of this anyway. It is a really positive step, but I am thinking about the future situation in which such vast sums of cash are, quite rightly, going to our local authorities, and I expect that Parliament will want to keep an eye on how that money is being used and on whether local authorities are getting a reasonable share of the overall pot of cash.

It will be, convener. There will potentially be £120 million per annum going to Scottish local authorities from a system administrator, who is to be appointed. That is very welcome. On parliamentary scrutiny in relation to all of that, do you anticipate that the system administrator would come to this Parliament to explain how they arrived at the breakdown for all 32 Scottish local authorities, to ensure that they are getting an appropriate share of the pot of cash that is created across the UK? What thoughts has the Scottish Government given to ensuring that the data that we get and the cash that local authorities get will be accurate and appropriate for each local authority?

Our committee papers state:

“The SA will then distribute that funding to local authorities. It will calculate the ‘net efficient disposal costs’ (efficient disposal costs in an assessment year, less waste income for that year)”,

which is partly because certain aspects are reserved. The explanation goes on. I will not go on, convener, but it can get quite complex.

My question is not on this either.

Of course.

To be fair, I did not ask about incineration.

Clearly, we can engage in partnership with local authorities on scrutiny work in relation to that issue, but I asked that question because I wonder whether the quantum of cash that will be available for Scotland has been agreed, because we are talking about levies that will apply to businesses like Amazon, which operate across the UK and internationally. Will the remote and rural weighting kick in once the cash has been established for Scotland or will that weighting be at a pan-UK level, which would give Scotland a larger pot of cash to begin with? Those things become quite important. Also, at a later date, a local authority that felt that it was not getting a reasonable share of the pot of cash might want to come to this committee and ask what we can do about that. That is why I was asking about the scheme administrator. I am trying to future-proof parliamentary scrutiny as much as anything else.

I am content with that. It is a complex area. It is about ensuring that the Government is live to the interaction between the regulations and the wider WEEE and other fiscal measures. That has been helpful. The terminology is dreadful—when I hear “WEEE” I think of a Nintendo Wii from several years ago—but I will leave it at that.

I have a brief observation. I did not think that I was going to make this comment, but I commend the Government for taking a very proportionate approach and looking constructively at the four-nations approach to going live in April next year. The Government is not rushing towards the need for an exemption from the UK Internal Market Act 2020 but taking a four-nations approach in the first instance, as we all have a common interest in the issue. That is a good tone to set as we seek to engage with the new UK Government, with the backstop measure of that exemption as and when required. I think that that is the way to do business, so I say thank you, cabinet secretary.