Seòmar agus comataidhean

Having listened to the evidence from experts this morning, we know that we need to act fast and decisively because carbon emissions are a massive issue around the globe. We will have major shifts in world climate; we are already seeing extreme weather, such as forest fires, which we have not talked about today but which could impact on peatland emissions; and we have 280,000 homes that are already at risk of flooding. We need more joined-up thinking and action; resilience and adaptation need to go together.

Another thing that we have not really talked about is how we will get the economic benefits of this in our communities across Scotland. We are still waiting for the energy strategy. We need a more detailed climate change plan and the investment that will transform our constituents’ lives and create the jobs, including local jobs, as well as the manufacturing and heat networks that could deliver lower bills, but we are not seeing the detail of that. We have talked about tree planting, for example. Where could we get more community benefits from tree planting?

There are lots of opportunities here. However, it is not about warm words; there must be a plan for action. We have climate and nature crises, and the Scottish Government needs to do more to bring people with us to make the transformation that we need, because it is sustainable development that will tackle what will be real challenges—the Gulf stream, for example, although we did not talk about that today. We might not be here in 30 years’ time, but the next generation will be, and it will be more than a challenge—there will be massive problems. This is a time for action, detail, information and bringing people with us, and the Scottish Government needs to do way more than it is doing at the moment.

The UK Government has argued that, although it acknowledges that there are sometimes exceptions, the conventional approach to commencement orders is for them to be made by the same body that introduced the parent legislation. The UK Government has highlighted that because any new fee system would take precedence over the current system upon commencement of the clause, there would be no delay if the Scottish ministers chose to introduce a new fee system.

Why have we not had a consultation on these changes? How is the Scottish Government engaging and ensuring that the feedback from key sectors and stakeholders is fed in, given, as you outlined in your initial comments, the quite significant changes that have been made in the past two years? Have any particular concerns been raised by smaller producers, local authorities or non-governmental organisations?

I think that issue about there not being a gap is important for environmental standards—we do not want to see a reduction in standards here.

One thing that strikes me here is that significant changes will be taking place, which includes new duties for local authorities and SEPA, but there is gap in relation to advertising the changes. How will our constituents know about them? We need there to be publicity, led by the Scottish Government, so that people will understand what is happening, because it will impact their everyday lives. The changes that the cabinet secretary has mentioned are pretty significant.

I would also like there to be monitoring and analysis of the registration fees that SEPA will receive. Although no concerns have been raised about that, that will enable us to see what practical change is taking place once delivery is under way.

Providing a lot more information on and giving a lot more publicity to the issue would be very much welcome.

Cabinet secretary, could you give a bit of clarity about the fees that will be introduced for electricity consent applications? Will those fees be ring fenced to support the work of the energy consents unit? I draw your attention to the views that we got from Scottish Environment LINK that, if we were to do that, it would be likely to lead to

“better resourcing of the determination process and therefore more timeous processing of applications, without being overly onerous for applicants.”

It is useful to get that on the record. For clarity, you said that you expect the fees to go to the energy consents unit, but can you confirm that that is definitely what will happen?

That would be useful. I know from being in various local authorities recently the differences between places where people can drop materials for collection 5 feet away and places where they have a long walk to recycle things. In the latter case, it is just not happening.

I have a couple of questions about the practical changes that the SSI will make. First, the cabinet secretary referred to the polluter-pays principle. What is the estimated income that will be generated for our local authorities in implementing this piece of work? Also, what are the estimated costs to SEPA of implementing these enforcement powers, and can it generate any income from this?

I want to put on the record what that means in practice. Is it moving from plastics to cardboard or reducing packaging entirely?