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 20 April 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 757 contributions

|

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 7 November 2023

Daniel Johnson

I am not used to all this lavish praise, convener.

I want to follow up on a couple of points that were discussed, particularly around transparency. I am always struck by the fact that, essentially, the discussion and debate around budget time is always at level 3 and level 4, yet the actual budget bill is, essentially, at level 1, and, critically, when you look at the outturn, you see that it is, by and large, specified at level 1.

I want to ask about transparency. I fully take on board your point that overprovision of information can be a problem, and I do not want to cause officials panic about lots more work, but is there a case to explore on whether outturn could be specified in a greater level of detail? I ask that because, ultimately, my basic point of principle is that, when you are setting a budget, you need to look at how you performed against last year’s budget, and the importance and the level of scrutiny is at level 3 and level 4. Do you think that there is a case to be made for looking at the degree to which we can report back at that level on outturn?

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill: Financial Memorandum

Meeting date: 7 November 2023

Daniel Johnson

Your answer almost demonstrates my point. At the moment, we do not know how this will all fit together. We do not know whether the co-design might actually come forward with things that would require different powers and abilities. The point of scrutiny is to look at whether the correct powers, procedures and fiscal measures are in place in order to support the policy intent and the outcomes of that legislation. The point is that you can look at it as a discrete package and not make it up as you go along.

I fundamentally fail to understand why the co-design is not done first, so that local authorities can set out what powers and financial considerations they need so that you can ensure that the legislation is in place to make sure that it works. Why not just do that co-design first, up front, and front-load it prior to introducing legislation? I just do not understand.

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill: Financial Memorandum

Meeting date: 7 November 2023

Daniel Johnson

I suggest that it is up to the Government to bring forward legislation that works, not legislation that does not. I also direct the minister to the Official Report of this meeting, where she will see that I clearly said that co-design could arrive at packages of measures that could be legislated for together. She might want to do that.

Finally, is this not a bit of a “Shakespeare in Love” approach to government? In the film, Geoffrey Rush’s character was frequently asked how on earth he was going to pull it off and deliver the play, and he said, “I don’t know. It’s a mystery.” Is that not the case with this, where we have a big plan, but we do not really know how it will be delivered?

11:00  

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill: Financial Memorandum

Meeting date: 7 November 2023

Daniel Johnson

We cannot amend. You understand that fundamental principle: we cannot amend and it is a single-stage process.

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill: Financial Memorandum

Meeting date: 7 November 2023

Daniel Johnson

I quite agree that you do not want individual bits of legislation for individual items or processes. I also totally understand the need for co-design: you have to get the detail right. What I struggle to understand, however, is why that co-design cannot happen prior to legislation being introduced. By all means, why not do that co-design and bring forward legislation in stages to deal with things and package them up together—for example, following consultation and co-design, deal with single-use items and the coffee cup measures in conjunction with measures for plastic carrier bags? Is there not a risk, given the complexities and given that we are seeking to recoup the full costs of the recycling and waste that is incurred? That is inherently complicated. If you take this legislation forward in a piecemeal way without a degree of interrogation and the three-stage parliamentary process, is there not a danger that we will get that wrong? Can you clarify why we cannot do the co-design first, prior to legislation? Do you not accept that, if detail is important, it is better to have more scrutiny rather than less?

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill: Financial Memorandum

Meeting date: 7 November 2023

Daniel Johnson

No, I am not.

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 7 November 2023

Daniel Johnson

I have been here before. [Laughter.]

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill: Financial Memorandum

Meeting date: 7 November 2023

Daniel Johnson

I am slightly nervous, given the billing that I got at the beginning, when you described me as a “stalwart”, convener. I feel that I have something to live up to.

May I clarify a couple of points based on answers that have already been given this morning? Is it correct to say, first, that we do not know what the full costs of the bill will be, because provisions are subject to co-design, and, secondly, that we do not have a detailed co-design process or timetable in place? Are both correct?

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill: Financial Memorandum

Meeting date: 7 November 2023

Daniel Johnson

I mean across the full scope of the bill. We do not know the full costs that will derive from the bill, because provisions are subject to co-design.

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill: Financial Memorandum

Meeting date: 7 November 2023

Daniel Johnson

On the narrow question, we do not, because we cannot, yet know the full cost.