Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have a very specific question about world heritage site designations. We have a range of world heritage sites in Scotland, but I am interested in the potential for further designations. Do the witnesses have any reflections on that? I know that St Andrews has been discussed in the past, but there might be other candidates.

It is on a new topic.

We are in a climate emergency, and some of your comments so far have focused on that. However, I want to consider the Government’s strategy, the first priority in which is delivering the transition to net zero. The focus here is primarily on our historic environment assets. Has there been enough embedding of the historic environment sector’s views in other Government strategies that push towards net zero?

I was particularly struck by AHSS’s submission, which mentions pre-1919 buildings in Scotland. Many of us, including myself, live in such buildings and recognise the challenges that they present, but also the importance of their design features. What are your thoughts on housing, retrofitting and skills development, and whether the historic environment sector could be a driver for a wider transition in housing?

On a related point, do you see tensions within climate policy more generally? I put this question to Caroline Warburton of VisitScotland. If the objective is to grow tourism in Scotland, would that come with increased use of aviation? If it would, that would take us backwards as regards climate change. There is also the historic environment sector’s role on designations. Does that create a brake on renewable energy development, such as the use of wind farms or conservation areas, or restrict the roll-out of embedded renewables such as solar panels?

There are tensions, but there are also opportunities. Could the historic environment sector be a real driver on skills and achieving progress?

That is a good reflection. I will aim to chip away at the cement-based render on the side of my house—over a number of years.

I suppose that the question is whether you think that that is sufficiently reflected in Government strategies. We have a heat in buildings strategy coming, we talked about skills earlier, and we have a historic environment strategy, but that is very much focused on the historic environment, and we know what needs to happen. Should your sector not be embedded in other strategies?

Before I ask my question, other witnesses might want to answer Donald Cameron’s question—if we have time—because it was a good question that raised an interesting issue.

I want to ask you about the charter for household recycling, which has been operating on a voluntary basis. What have been the challenges around implementing it? If we are to see a shift to more of a statutory code, what does the co-development around that look like from the point of view of local authorities?

I ask Gail Macgregor to answer those questions, because she mentioned earlier that sort of co-design and co-production with the minister.

Yes, I think so. It cut out a little bit at the end. I suppose the question is: based on the engagement you have had already with the development of DRS and other schemes, is that the model of engagement you would expect going forward? If there is more secondary legislation that is coming down the tracks, would you expect that early engagement and that joint work with Zero Waste Scotland and through COSLA? Despite some of the complexities around DRS and the changes, has that generally worked? Is that an appropriate way for you to be engaged within this and does that deliver enough certainty, I suppose?

Yes.

I want to ask you about your experience of the most problematic waste streams. We have heard some evidence about furniture that has POPs in it. I am sure that there are lots of other waste streams where there are particular challenges with volume or handling of materials. Could you outline what those are? How do you see the bill addressing some of those issues? I am thinking of single-use charging or even the banning of certain products. Let us start with Glasgow City Council.

I will wrap up a couple of questions together. The last panel mentioned the recycling improvement fund. I wanted to get your perspectives on that, how you have used that, if you have, in recent years, and whether you see a continuation of that fund as being important to deliver the aspects that are covered by the bill.

I have a broader point about the bill. It is a framework bill and it has provisions to bring in secondary legislation. Can you reflect on whether you have engaged with secondary legislation in the past, such as that on the deposit return scheme and other bits of secondary legislation that are in this waste management space? What is the most effective way for you to be able to input a view ahead of decisions being made or while secondary legislation is being scrutinised in Parliament?