Seòmar agus comataidhean

Okay. I will try to stick to things that we can develop today.

We know that environmental stakeholders have been highly critical of the scope of the review—in particular, the level of consideration of environmental courts—and that some have called for a further independent review. Does the Government accept that the review that it published was too narrow in scope and has consideration been given to the need for a further independent review in the area?

Really serious concerns have been raised, even as recently as last week. I note media reports that

“fragile and damaged marine life around Scotland’s coasts is not being properly protected”

because the Scottish Government has repeatedly missed

“its deadlines to protect vulnerable marine life.”

The Marine Conservation Society and the National Trust for Scotland raised that issue just last week, and Open Seas has raised concerns, too. Those organisations point to multiple failings on the part of the Scottish Government in relation to marine conservation policy, citing a lack of proper oversight and governance. They have said that there is

“a failure to survey all the seabed and marine features”

and expressed concerns about marine protected areas.

Those are not my concerns; they are those of serious organisations. Can the cabinet secretary say anything today to reassure them, or are they all wrong?

Thank you.

I think that you will say that you cannot answer my next question, either. The proposed human rights bill has been mentioned. What is the Government’s view on the human right to a healthy environment? Are you still strongly committed to that, even if you cannot comment on that legislation today? How important is that to improving environmental governance?

Thank you.

I would be happy to meet the cabinet secretary and her officials.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I could not connect to the app. I would have voted no.

Yesterday was world pre-eclampsia day. Women and babies in Scotland have died, so the First Minister’s words will not reassure anyone. Today, I have had written answers from the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health, telling us about scoping inquiries and writing again to health boards because of the capacity and infrastructure challenges that they have raised.

That is not good enough—it is reactive. The Government is responding because people with lived experience are campaigning and demanding urgent action, including those who are aligned with Action on Pre-eclampsia, and because of the campaign by the Sunday Post, which was launched on Sunday. Again, the Government is on the back foot. The lives of women and babies are at risk and, sadly, some have died. Therefore, will the First Minister and other relevant ministers meet, as a matter of priority, people who have been directly impacted and learn from what has already been rolled out in Wales and England? Women in Scotland deserve the same.

It is nice to come in after Douglas Lumsden, having heard him be very passionate about reusable items. Mr Lumsden, I ask you just to hold that thought.

I want to come in briefly to support amendment 25, in the name of Graham Simpson, on biodegradable items being exempt from a charge. It is important that people who are already trying to be more circular and environmentally friendly are not penalised for that. I am happy to support that amendment.

Amendment 26 provides helpful clarity for business. However, I will not be supporting amendment 35, which seeks to strip out section 9. That part of the bill is important.

Thank you, convener. I am grateful for your remarks. You spoke well on this group.

We all have examples of serious fly-tipping in our regions and constituencies. I was asked to speak at a Keep Scotland Beautiful conference in my region a couple of months ago. I pay tribute to the volunteers who are out trying to deal with litter and fly-tipping every weekend—in fact, every day of the week. People are frustrated and there is recognition that current regulations and enforcement practices are not robust enough.

Mr Simpson talked about SEPA. I am interested to hear what Mr Lumsden says about that. I know from my research for my proposed member’s bill on ecocide that people are asking what we can do with existing powers to strengthen enforcement, but there is a big question mark about resources for SEPA and local authorities.

That leads me back to prevention and having a deterrent. We can try to save money by making fly-tipping unattractive for the criminals—let us just call them what they are. Some fly-tipping is on an industrial level and some of it is organised crime, which is a growing problem across Europe. Europol has done some interesting work on it. One of the fastest-growing areas of crime relates to waste.

We discussed the issue with Michael Matheson when he was Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero, Energy and Transport. At that point, there had been a big programme about it on the BBC. I discussed it a lot with Lorna Slater in her previous role as Minister for Green Skills, Circular Economy and Biodiversity. Like Murdo Fraser, who is not at the meeting but has done a power of work on the matter, I am grateful to Ms Slater for all her work. It is interesting to hear that he and Ms Slater had constructive talks, because that is a side of their relationship that we do not hear about often on social media or in newspaper columns. Let us get that firmly on the record, because the reality is that a lot of work goes on behind the scenes.

Fly-tipping is a universal problem across Scotland. It is very much an issue for rural communities, but it is also an urban issue. I want to speak in favour of the amendments in the group. I note that Edward Mountain will not move his amendment 121, but I am interested to hear what the minister has to say, because the amendments are about empowering our local authorities and other regulators, such as SEPA, and trying to get behaviour change on a nationwide level. Right now, the people who are responsible for fly-tipping are completely unfussed about the consequences of it. Not enough fines are dished out—I have seen that through my research.

The reaction to Murdo Fraser’s bill proposal has been really positive. If it looks like the Government will not support his bill as a stand-alone piece of legislation, I would be keen to see how much of it can be brought into the Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill.