Skip to main content
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 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 16 December 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 3354 contributions

|

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 25 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

Thanks. Sorry for cutting you off, Jeremy.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 25 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

Thanks. That is useful.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 25 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

I want to focus on compensation for improvements. Will new schedule 5 to the 1991 act, which will be inserted by section 14(9) of the bill, improve the process for agreeing improvements between tenant and landlord? In some of the evidence that we have had there has been a bit of concern about the split between those measures that require notice and those that require consent. What are your thoughts on those splits and on schedule 5?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 25 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

My final question is about the process of diversification and whether you have comments on that, following on from our discussion about environmental improvements.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 25 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

I will come back on that briefly. Mr Doris is right to highlight that there are elements of the statutory instrument that enable alignment with the EU. However, there are other aspects, particularly when it comes to the phasing out of certain POPs within the regulations, where there is active divergence. I do not think that Mr Doris is right to say that this is a temporary measure and that the UK’s—and Scotland’s—approach will eventually align with that of the EU. Yes, it is about adopting regulation of the chemicals that are highlighted under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, and there will be continuing alignment on that matter, but on the pace of change in ruling out and removing these toxic chemicals from our waste streams and our environment, there is now active divergence. That is why I oppose this SI; it is not to do with the other elements that Mr Doris mentioned, which are welcome.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 25 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

Part 4 of new schedule 5 to the 1991 act lists the improvements that facilitate sustainable and regenerative agriculture. Is the inclusion of that list helpful? Are things missing from it? There was a comment about soil carbon, which of course will be hugely important, but perhaps raises a question about landlord and tenant. Who has access to that resource? Who stewards it? Christopher, do you want to come in?

Meeting of the Parliament

Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3

Meeting date: 25 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

I have no more comments to add. I press amendment 46.

Amendment 46 agreed to.

Amendments 47 and 48 moved—[Mark Ruskell]—and agreed to.

Amendment 67 moved—[Maurice Golden]—and agreed to.

Amendment 77 moved—[Monica Lennon]—and agreed to.

Amendment 49 moved—[Maurice Golden].

Meeting of the Parliament

Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3

Meeting date: 25 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

Will the member take an intervention?

Meeting of the Parliament

Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3

Meeting date: 25 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

Will Graham Simpson comment on the minister’s view that, as his amendment 35 refers to “existing” networks of community reuse organisations, the provision would not apply to new networks? Did he consider that in drafting the amendment?

Meeting of the Parliament

Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3

Meeting date: 25 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

I thank Monica Lennon for continuing to press and campaign on this issue. It is clear that we need good reuse schemes operating for lots of types of items in our economy, and nappies are a good example. I would add bikes, too. There are great initiatives involving bike libraries being set up, through which local authorities are working with social enterprises in a similar way. There are loads of opportunities for councils to work with the third sector to drive forward on reuse. However, I think that the most appropriate way to develop reuse schemes is through the waste route map, and that we should not put individual schemes in the bill.

My amendment 44, which we discussed earlier, requires ministers to consider reuse, refill and take-back schemes as part of the strategy. Personally, I will absolutely hold the minister to account—I know that Monica Lennon will, too—to ensure that nappies are considered as part of that, because there is a strong case for that. However, there is a doubt in my mind, because we have to acknowledge that reusable nappy schemes have been on the go for more than 20 years. I was proud to use them for my children, 18 years ago, through a social enterprise in Stirling, and I know that Monica Lennon has used them for her children this year. Given that we had successful schemes almost 20 years ago, we need to understand why the public uptake has not followed on the back of that.

I think that Monica Lennon secured a win by working with the then minister, Lorna Slater, to get a Government-commissioned report by the James Hutton Institute on the public attitude towards reusable nappies. I hope that that will point to a way ahead to make reuse schemes more accessible, cheaper and more successful. However, I do not think that we can draw in all that learning and put a requirement in the bill to have such schemes.