Seòmar agus comataidhean

We have had the landfill tax for a while now, as have Wales and England. Why has the Scottish Government not looked into the potential for a differential rate before this point?

I would certainly welcome that. I entirely understand the risk of waste tourism—none of us wants to see that. My concern is that, as is so often the case, we are not hitting the targets that have been set in legislation by the Parliament in relation to emissions reduction, waste reduction, recycling and so on. It seems that one of our key levers is not based on the targets that have been set by the Parliament; it is based on a very risk-averse response to what the UK Government’s policy making is for England. I would certainly welcome that work being done ahead of the next budget.

Good morning. I should say from the outset that I entirely accept that it is impossible to completely estimate the cost of the bill, given the stigma around addiction.

That said, I will pick up on one specific area in which concerns have been raised, which is social work costs. Am I right in my understanding that the financial memorandum does not take account of increased social work costs related to the bill?

I would certainly welcome that additional work happening. It seems that the single deciding factor in setting the rate in Scotland is the rate in England. However, we have our own climate targets and waste reduction targets. What regard has been given to the impact that setting the landfill tax rate at an equivalent level to the English rate would have on the targets that we have set in Scotland?

On all those targets—climate emissions, waste reduction, circular economy and so on—our targets are either more ambitious than England’s or we have targets in areas that they simply do not have. It seems that there is a dichotomy, because the tax is one of the key drivers for meeting those targets. The rate that we have set it at does not seem to be based on what we would need to do to hit those targets; it seems to be based entirely on the rate that the UK Government has set in England.

I understand the delivery mechanism, but if we are trying to get an accurate understanding of how much it costs at present per individual, for example, surely it would be crucial to take into account the associated social work costs. I understand that there is a bit of a data-availability issue, because a lot of that data does not go through the drug and alcohol information system—DAISy—but I presume that councils would, to some extent, be able to provide information via freedom of information requests. Social work is quite a substantial additional area of cost that is not reflected in the financial memorandum, which would make it quite hard to get an understanding of the likely cost per individual.

I appreciate that. However, there is potential for the costs to increase, because we would all hope that even just through the publicity around the bill, more people would come forward to have an existing addiction diagnosed, and thereby access support. As things stand, do you have any data on associated social work costs from local authorities?

That would be useful.

What is the expected timescale for publication of the review and the Government’s response?

Yes.

I recognise that and appreciate the discussions that we have had in the past. Would the Government be able to put some of the costings and estimates that it has made in the public domain? I am conscious that we have had that conversation, but I was not entirely convinced by the information that was provided, and I do not want to breach confidentiality. It is the Government’s information to put in the public domain, but it would be helpful for us.