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 5 September 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 3036 contributions

|

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Planning and Infrastructure Bill

Meeting date: 27 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

So, there will be two systems?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 27 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

You mentioned earlier the environmental outcomes and the increased emissions from not including glass in the system, so we do not need to dwell on that.

Wales is going ahead with including glass. I think that you said that that is primarily because Wales has a very high recycling rate and sees this as a way to drive it to the next level. How will the Welsh scheme be interoperable with the scheme that Scotland will now be part of? Are there discussions about how that interoperability will work and about the internal market act implications of the regulations in Wales? That is pertinent to the discussions that we had in Scotland a couple of years ago. Can Wales actually go ahead with this? Will it work with the scheme that you are now signed up to?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 27 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

If Wales is granted an internal market act exemption, it will be somewhat bittersweet for you and for the Scottish Government, but would it provide a route for you to come back at some point and include glass within a UK and Scottish scheme?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 27 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

Can I pick up on the council issue before you bring Haydn Thomas in? My understanding is that the inclusion of glass in the DRS would have meant that many councils could have wound down or reduced their kerbside recycling operations and saved money as a result. Are you expecting any changes due to councils having to maintain glass recycling—at a cost to them, because they do not make a profit from it—as a result of glass not being included? I am interested in where the cost will arise. Will it come to local authorities or will the extended producer responsibility kick in, with local authorities getting money for running such schemes? They will still have to collect and deal with what is a bulky, expensive and difficult-to-handle material.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 27 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

Okay. Haydn, will you comment on the economics of the exclusion of glass?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Planning and Infrastructure Bill

Meeting date: 27 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

Yes. I read Scotland Against Spin’s response to the committee. I think that it was possibly the only group that actually submitted evidence. I recognise that there is a concern.

I wanted to ask for your view, cabinet secretary, on whether the good practice principles on community engagement are already being adhered to or whether you can point to examples of where developers are not engaging early on with communities, not doing a pre-application consultation, not holding exhibitions, and not gathering feedback on a development application and then offering feedback to those who have put in their views as to whether, as a result of those views, changes are being made or rejected. I am interested in the development process, how communities get involved very early on and how their views are respected.

Is the current voluntary system working, or are you coming across developers who are ignoring or bypassing it and saying, “It’s fine, we will just get through with very limited consultation”? Is good practice happening widely across the industry, or is that not happening, which is why you are bringing a mandatory requirement?

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee

Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 21 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

Do we need legislation for that?

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee

Dog Theft (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 21 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

For sure. We have had evidence to suggest that, in order to prove an aggravation, it has to be demonstrated that the accused knew that the dog was an assistance dog—in other words, a link must be made between knowing that a dog was an assistance dog and then going on to steal it. What are your thoughts on that? Your intention is, I think, that the aggravation should apply regardless of whether somebody knew that the dog was an assistance dog.

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee

Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 21 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

We will come to part 2 of the bill, on environmental assessment, later, but it strikes me that a huge amount of work has already been done through the environmental assessment process around forestry licence applications and development applications. I am interested in your thoughts on how we make best use of the data that is already out there to help to set targets, monitor progress and guide decision making.

Millions of pounds are being invested every single year in assessment and working out what is happening with protected species and recovery, and with the environmental impact of development, yet I do not get a sense of where all the information and knowledge sits within the bill and in the strategies.

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee

Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 21 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

That is fine.

My final question is for Caroline McParland. The existing system of environmental assessment within European law has functioned for 30 or 40 years. I want to get a sense from those who carry out environmental assessments in industry, and from your clients, of how beneficial it is to have certainty in the system. Is the system a well-used one that people understand? Are people satisfied that, broadly, the current system does what it is intended to do, or is there a real appetite for changing it and reform?