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 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 4 July 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2999 contributions

|

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee

Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 14 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

Can you spell out what the concern is with the legal regime in other parts of the UK?

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee

Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 14 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

Define good finance.

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 14 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

In the inshore environment.

Rural Affairs and Islands Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 14 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

Does that mean that, if those salmon farms were involved in production, we could not buy that fish with RSPCA accreditation from Marks and Spencer or anywhere else?

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Beaches

Meeting date: 14 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

I thank Kenny Gibson for bringing the debate to the chamber. We have this debate pretty much every year, and it is really good to be able to reflect on the progress that has been made and to celebrate MCS’s on-going, excellent work.

As we have heard in contributions from all members, Scotland undoubtedly has some of the most beautiful beaches in Europe. It would be remiss of me not to mention West Sands in St Andrews and Silver Sands in Aberdour, in my region. We have thousands of miles of beaches and coasts, which not only are home to nature but keep us active and healthy, and bring pleasure to millions of people. They also tell us the story of our communities and are wonderful places for learning and discovery for people of all ages.

Although our beaches and coasts are also on the front line of climate change, with threats from storms and sea level rises, our shores hold part of the solution as to how we can adapt to climate change, too. I was really delighted to visit Restoration Forth’s seagrass project recently. I see that Ben Macpherson is nodding, as he will recognise that project from this side of the Forth—in particular, the excellent work on oyster bed recovery.

I was particularly struck by that work on seagrass, which is—or was—found in many sheltered areas and coasts. Not only is seagrass a wonderful nursery for marine life, but it captures 35 times more carbon than the rainforests do. It feels to me that restoring seagrass and working with communities is a great way to address some of the impacts of climate change and to empower people. We need to find those wins for nature and climate that create that sweet spot for community action. Seagrass is a really good example.

Many more coastal projects have been funded through the nature restoration fund, which is creating a real focal point for community empowerment. It would be great to hear the minister reflect on the success of that fund and where it will go in the future. However, what we have learned through the surveys, particularly in the past couple of years, is that our beaches are sadly becoming dirtier, with a rising tide of marine litter. To return to seagrass, 92 per cent of our seagrass across the UK has been destroyed, in part because of litter. This year’s “State of our beaches” report shows an increase in the proportion of litter that is found on our beaches for the second year in a row. We cannot ignore the fact that drinks bottles and cans remain a major part of the beach litter problem.

Changing behaviour and attitudes is one part of the solution. A number of members have mentioned the success of the carrier bag charge, which came in more than a decade ago. As a result, there has been an 80 per cent reduction in bags turning up as marine litter. Clearly, incentives for citizens and consumers work, but it is also important that we do not forget that the polluter should pay and that producers of waste should ultimately take responsibility for it.

In the previous session, the Parliament agreed to the deposit return scheme for drinks containers, putting the responsibility back on to producers to run their own take-back scheme that would work for the public. I remember that, when the DRS was being considered by the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee, the many years of MCS beach cleans were a central part of the evidence in favour of the DRS scheme, which was originally introduced by Roseanna Cunningham.

It is disappointing that, in this session of Parliament, ostensible lobbying from the glass industry undermined the scheme that had been developed in Scotland. Ultimately, it was blocked by the UK Government. As we move past that period and look to a new UK-wide DRS, although it will arguably be weaker, it is important to acknowledge that, in many ways, the worsening condition of our beaches is happening because vested interests have had some considerable success in slowing environmental regulation.

Members talk about nurdles and microplastics, so there is a role for regulation here. There is a role for making the polluter pay and for driving industry towards innovation to find solutions. Voluntary action can take us only so far. For decades, raising the floor of regulation across Europe was how we delivered environmental progress. That is why maintaining alignment with European Union laws will be important for the health of our coasts, nature and bathing waters. It is also why Environmental Standards Scotland has such an important role in holding Governments and regulators to account post Brexit, so that we can continue that progress.

I am a little disappointed that we will not see the promised water and sewage bill from the Scottish Government in this session. Maybe the minister will have more to say on that. That could have kept up the pressure for improvement.

I believe that communities, from wild swimmers to dog walkers, have a role to play in monitoring the state of our beaches and making a small but important contribution to cleaning up. I join other members in thanking volunteers and celebrating that work. I am already looking forward to joining my next beach clean in Fife.

18:42  

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Grangemouth (Project Willow)

Meeting date: 13 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

What you are suggesting would be very much a bespoke project—that is, the application of hydrogen heating in a particular geographic area, rather than more of a national approach to the adoption of heating in individual homes.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Grangemouth (Project Willow)

Meeting date: 13 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

John Andresen, could you share your views on that issue, and also talk about the international comparisons? Are other countries taking different approaches to which sectors are being targeted for hydrogen investment? Are there stark differences in approach?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Grangemouth (Project Willow)

Meeting date: 13 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

Nigel Holmes, you mentioned the fertiliser sector; we do not have a fertiliser sector here, but it could be brought back effectively and decarbonised that way. What do you see as the areas that we need to focus most on in the hydrogen hierarchy?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Grangemouth (Project Willow)

Meeting date: 13 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

Okay. Is that in the context of society becoming increasingly electrified in terms of both transport and heating, and therefore needing a back-up system to release that energy during winter or at other times when demand is high?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Petition

Meeting date: 13 May 2025

Mark Ruskell

I would welcome that approach. Since the committee last took evidence on this issue, which was in May 2023, we have seen quite a few changes. Low-emission zones have been rolled out in Scotland; there is increasing evidence with regard to particulates from wood-burning stoves; and new scientific evidence is coming along about the impact of air pollution on child development. Therefore, I would say yes to the suggestion that has been made. Now would be a good time to reflect on the evidence, take stock and write to the stakeholders who were part of the initial inquiry.