Seòmar agus comataidhean

Good morning, gentlemen. I declare a lifelong interest in Prestwick airport from the start, given that I used to live in Monkton and I joined the crowds in the football field across from my house to watch the inaugural flight of Concorde in 1969—that is how old I am.

I want to use my time to look at the airport’s income streams beyond flight operation; in particular I am interested in agreements with wind farm developers for mitigation payments. You will be aware of the findings of the reports on Clauchrie and Sanquhar. Having read the reports, it seems that the airport’s approach to negotiating mitigation settlements with wind farms has been challenged in several recent planning inquiries for such developments. From comments made by wind farm developers and reporters, it is reasonable to say that your approach is more aggressive than the norm. In particular, you have sought to receive on-going payments beyond an initial lump sum—you have sought to receive payments based on the number of megawatts generated. Most worryingly, you have taken an approach that uses non-disclosure agreements to conceal the value of payments and prevent public scrutiny. I am taking that straight from the report. Do you feel that that is an accurate description of the approach that you have taken to wind farms?

Anna, would you like to add anything?

The focus of your answer was very much on penalising those who do not comply, but there is another side to that coin. Should we not be encouraging people to comply? Instead of just a stick, do we not need a stick and a carrot? How do we encourage rather than penalise? I think that that is always a better approach to take, if you can.

My questions are for Jocelyn Blériot and Anna Larsson. At the moment, there is a lot of focus in Scotland on single-use items, such as vapes, and we are also looking at the disposal of unsold goods. The bill would give the Scottish Government powers to tackle those issues, but are there any international examples that we should be focusing on and which we could emulate to help us develop more successful legislation? I would ask that, when you answer, you comment, please, on how we can engage with business, as it is so important that we take business with us and ensure that there is no uncertainty about how to do business.

I put that question to Jocelyn first.

It was about charges for single-use products and whether we should adopt that idea.

Thank you very much.

I am going to try to dip my toe into the murky waters of the difference between devolved and reserved areas and how they could interact with the bill. I want to avoid some of the troubles that we have had in the past in developing policy in this area. I assume that my questions are for Aileen and Feja, but if I am wrong in that, please tell me.

As you said, there is a real complexity around the interactions. Although waste is a devolved policy area, it will inevitably interact with UK reserved areas, such as EPR and, as we saw recently, the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 has also raised its head. I will ask a few questions about the key challenges in navigating that complex environment, especially because, as we heard earlier, divergence in policy is not necessarily a bad thing, in that one devolved nation can lead another by highlighting good practice. How do we use the common frameworks to support that policy coherence?

We have recent experience of the internal market act and its effect on the deposit return scheme and the single-use plastics ban. How do we utilise those opportunities and avoid some of the—to use a technical term—bun fighting that took place recently?

I will ask Feja to answer first. If I am going to the wrong people here, please let me know.

I commend my colleague Bob Doris for trying to keep politics out of this, but I am going to throw it back in again. Is the problem not that the relationship between the two Governments has never been worse, and that the lack of collaboration and the intransigence towards each other are complicating the way in which we are trying to develop the bill?

I thought that SNIB funded £5 million and up, and that Scottish Enterprise funded £1 million to £5 million.

Good morning. I will be brief. I will ask my question in two parts. The first part is to Jordan Jack and the second is to Mike Duncan.

The Scottish Government has a target of reducing car mileage by 20 per cent by 2030. I am interested in the impact. Currently, we are trying to prevent cars from coming into city centres. I had my own experience of that in Aberdeen a couple of weeks ago, as I tried to navigate my way around, having not been there for a while. First, I wonder whether our public transport system has the capability to pick up the slack, if you like, of people travelling into and out of our city centres for purchases or for work. Secondly, what will be the impact on our city centres of preventing people from coming in and out by car for work and to shop when it comes to recruitment and retention and turnover for businesses? Jordan Jack, is the north-east set up to take up a reduction in cars?