Seòmar agus comataidhean

Environmental impact assessments will still apply. That is effectively what I am saying. There is no dilution of that in any way.

Yes, I do. Six weeks—

I think that there is always a route. I mentioned that some other countries have looked again at their deposit return schemes after five years or so and decided to change their regulations and include glass, so it can be done. I remember the cabinet secretary at the time of our regulations saying that there is a cost associated with that, because the scheme will have been set up to take the original materials. That includes the reverse vending machines and everything else that we have talked about today. That is one of the reasons why we wanted to include glass, because, if you start with glass, there is less cost associated with changing the scope later.

It will be very interesting for Scotland, the UK and Northern Ireland to look at what happens in Wales, because if it is able to have its own scheme that includes glass, it will give us a template. We will be able to look at how it works and at the recycling rates and learn from them. The beauty of having devolved Governments is that we do learn from one another. It would not be the first time that Scotland had adopted something that Wales had done first or vice versa.

All that I can say to Ms Boyack is that I am open to having discussions with COSLA and any local authorities on how we can improve recycling rates and whether there are ways in which we can help them. That is why the Circular Economy (Scotland) Act 2024 put the route map in the hands of those who deliver on waste recovery—our 32 local authorities—for them to work together on ways to bring the recycling rates up and the waste levels down in many areas.

I make that general offer if certain local authorities think that they can do more with regard to glass. With the landscape that we have, which includes the DRS, EPR and the circular economy route map, I am absolutely open to having those conversations, and I regularly have them with COSLA anyway.

I can take Bob Doris through that. Ministers decided that UK DMO Ltd will be designated as the scheme administrator for Scotland’s DRS, although obviously that is subject to approval in Parliament. DEFRA and DAERA have appointed the same organisation. The administrator is responsible for the operational design and delivery of the scheme.

Interested parties were invited to submit applications to be designated as the scheme administrator for the DRS in Scotland, and that window was open from 2 December to 3 February. The application process requested essential information about the applicant and information on operational plans, financial management and cross-cutting issues. Officials assessed the applications in accordance with the three-nation process. All three nations were involved in deciding on which applicant became the scheme administrator. Based on the assessment of the applicants, ministers from the three nations concluded that the UK DMO Ltd application was successful.

I will point to some of the things that have been put in place, which I think strengthen the regulations. People will be able to request a review of the scheme administrator’s decisions, as Ailsa Heine pointed out. Also, the scheme administrator will determine any exemptions and associated fees. Those matters will no longer be for Scottish ministers. Exemption from operating a return point will also be in the gift of the scheme administrator. Those are probably the headline differences.

No—it is not a public body.

Yes. That is a very important point. People must be able to know where the return points will be in their locality, and that is something that the scheme administrator will be assessing. When the approaches from vendors to have voluntary return points come in, it is important that there is an assessment of any gaps. Particularly for Scotland, it will be important to know whether there are any areas with gaps, because the scheme must be equitable; we expect people to have equal access to the scheme.

This year, we will be commencing the packaging extended producer responsibility—EPR—scheme. It will have a transformative effect on the packaging industry, impacting the packaging that we see on the shelves of our supermarkets and shops and the funding model for local authority recycling and waste management.

Packaging EPR will implement the polluter-pays principle and place responsibility for funding the collection and disposal of household packaging waste on to the businesses that produce it. The order that is before you will enable SEPA to use civil sanctions in relation to offences under the UK EPR for packaging regulations—the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging and Packaging Waste) Regulations 2024—which came into force on 1 January 2025.

The order provides SEPA with access to civil enforcement measures, such as fixed and variable monetary penalties, rather than relying on criminal offences. It confers no additional responsibility on to SEPA but provides it with a wider range of enforcement powers to allow a flexible and proportionate response to offences. These powers will support the implementation of packaging EPR by ensuring that SEPA can take appropriate action against businesses that do not fulfil their obligations, enabling the correct funding to be available for local authorities and creating a level playing field for compliant businesses.

I am aware of general concerns about the time that it takes for applications to go through. You have highlighted, and I have previously mentioned, the work that the Scottish Government has done in doubling the capacity of the ECU. I have also had discussions with SEPA, which is currently working on its business plan to deal with the volume of applications that it is getting, not only from the pumped hydro storage sector but from all areas in which it has a responsibility to report.

You will be aware of the work that the Minister for Public Finance, Ivan McKee, and I have been doing to provide local authorities with access to the expertise that they might not have in-house but which they need in order to be able to make determinations on complex applications. Mr McKee is rolling out the planning hub model, not only for energy consents and applications but for planning applications more widely. The more complex applications get, the more individual local authorities might not have the necessary expertise in-house, but they will be able to procure it centrally to allow them to assess the applications that come before them.

A number of things are being done, but I take your point about SEPA in particular. You have provided me with some detail on the issue. Anyone from the pumped hydro storage sector who has concerns about it can raise them with me directly and I can speak to SEPA directly about it.

I have spoken to SEPA about its capacity in general in dealing with energy consents. SEPA is aware of the concerns about its capacity in that regard and is looking to manage its resource to cope with the demand and the complexity so that we can still get consents out to people in a timely fashion.