Seòmar agus comataidhean

That was considered. We do an options appraisal as we gain more information. However, section 5 is not purely focused on the UKIMA situation; it also takes into account that the industry is very fast moving and that procedures can change. We might need the requirement to amend schedule 1 but, from a safety perspective, there is also a need to provide for innovation in new techniques to perform the various procedures, so the bill needs to respond to a fast-changing environment.

I go back to my response to Roz McCall, which was that the bill can makes changes in key areas, such as age restrictions and the premises that are used, that are incredibly important from a public health perspective.

On your first point, convener, it is fair to say that conversations about the bill that I have had with members from across the chamber show clear support for ensuring that we get this right from a public health perspective. I therefore appreciate the scrutiny that this committee and the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee have been giving to the bill.

As you correctly pointed out, part of the situation with UKIMA relates to the fact that the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government are unable to set training and supervision standards for Scotland in this area. We consider that part 3 of UKIMA would be engaged by legislation that sets training standards for practitioners or prevents practitioners who do not hold certain qualifications or are not existing professionals from providing certain procedures. That was a clear concern for us when we were drafting the bill.

As soon as we recognised that, we engaged with the UK Government, and I am pleased that that engagement has been very positive. It is on-going, but we are engaging across the issue because there is a recognition that we need to get it right. As you know, the UK Government is also looking at bringing in legislation in this area of public health concern. We need to get it right for people in both Scotland and the rest of the UK.

In what respect?

The reason for introducing the SSI is to return the statute book to how it should be. The statute book has not been updated, so it still refers to “EU law”, which is no longer factually correct, because we now have “assimilated law”. That is the change that will be made.

The UK Government is currently working to improve relationships with the EU. Of course, the Scottish Government believes that Scotland’s best interests would be served by rejoining the EU as an independent member state, but, until we get to that point, it is important that we rebuild a close relationship. When the work on an EU reset is done, we will have a statute book in which that work can be integrated quickly and efficiently.

I am pleased to join the committee to consider the draft Food Safety Act 1990 Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2026. As the committee will be aware, I am advised on food safety standards and labelling by Food Standards Scotland. The proposed minor technical amendments arise as a consequence of the UK Government’s decision to leave the European Union and the need to ensure that the statute book in Scotland remains operable. Food Standards Scotland worked diligently with the Food Standards Agency and the Scottish Government to update “EU law” references to “retained EU law” references where they were found.

The instrument relates to a deficiency in the 1990 act, which provides the legal foundation for food safety standards in Great Britain. The amendments to the 1990 act were originally going to be made by a GB statutory instrument. However, once it became apparent that the Food Standards Agency and the UK Government were pausing the GB SI, Food Standards Scotland and the Scottish Government agreed that the responsible approach would be to introduce a Scottish statutory instrument instead. The approach serves to enhance the clarity and accessibility of the devolved statute book and give the Parliament reassurance that orderly preparations are being made in Scotland for an EU reset. I stress that the amendments are technical in nature and do not amount to any change in policy. They are necessary to ensure that the statute book is brought up to date. There will be no impact on businesses or any other stakeholder group. I ask the committee to agree to the proposed instrument, and I am happy to take any questions.

I have had a lot of conversations with officials, third sector organisations and public health areas and businesses. My understanding is that most people recognise what calories are, so they can make informed decisions when calories are on the product. Again, we have received evidence from Food Standards Scotland and Public Health Scotland, and more widely through Nesta and Obesity Action Scotland, about the impact of diets that are high in fat, salt and sugar on health outcomes, whether it be type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular issues and so on.

We have to be clear and understand the resource that COSLA believes that it needs.

I recognise the work that you do on ultra-processed food. You are right that, initially, the Scottish Government thought that the measures would have to be introduced through primary legislation. However, work that has been done across the years has shown that regulations are the best way to introduce such provisions. Regulations will allow the changes to take place more quickly and, to take a phrase from Ewan MacDonald-Russell and David McColgan on the previous panel, we need to see it done. That is why we are implementing the measures through regulations.

That will be absolutely key. The committee has just heard some evidence about the importance of the work that the University of Leeds has done on the implementation of regulations in England. We have asked Public Health Scotland to ensure that it is doing the right evaluation and to look at how the regulation ties into our population health framework.

We have had many conversations about this topic. I am very clear that I am pleased that we are introducing the regulations at this time. Do I think that we can go further? Yes, I do, and we are continuing to do that work, certainly through one particular piece of legislation—the Good Food Nation (Scotland) Act 2022—and the population health framework. I think that you are right: there is no one solution that will improve the health of people living in Scotland. There has to be a much wider and more rounded whole-person approach.

Just yesterday, I spent some time in Dunoon in my constituency with people from the Argyll and Bute youth action council. We were talking about the importance of healthy food in their diet, having lessons on cooking healthy soups and so on. I do think that we need that whole-person approach. I should say that we were also talking very much about the importance of activity and recognising the importance of getting out in nature. In fact, there were some young people from Helensburgh—which is not in my constituency—who were part of a group who climbed to the top of Ben Nevis, and that gave them a lot of learning points. They learned from the exercise about the importance of having good nutrition to keep their energy levels up as they were climbing the hill, as well as about the importance of teamwork and working together to improve health and wellbeing.