Chamber and committees

It will have to go through the same process as every other SSI.

It absolutely has not been discussed on a four-nations basis, which is why the internal market act exclusion is so impossible for us, because the UK Government is saying, “You must comply with our deposit level,” but it has not even begun the work to establish what that deposit level will be.

Certainly. Gateway reviews are done periodically on a big delivery process such as the DRS. The purpose of a gateway review is to give a snapshot of progress on delivery, to help us to understand how our on-going engagement is working—both in delivering that project and in working with industry—and to give us guidance on how to move forward.

That gateway review was a snapshot of project delivery in March. Of course, since March, we have had substantial changes to the scheme, including the delay that was announced to 1 March 2024. Since then, we have also had the intervention through the internal market act, which has created a necessary change to our schedule.

In parallel with the gateway review—as part of the on-going assessment that we always do—we announced in April a set of changes to the scheme to address some stakeholder concerns. Work to deliver the programme necessitated those changes, and we revised the governance arrangement and put in place a system-wide assurance group, with the ministerial strategic assurance group and sector-specific groups. Those groups had already started to meet. We were working together towards that practical delivery.

We had developed the regulations that are being discussed today, which change the scope of the scheme, and bolster our resource. We have a much larger DRS team now to help to deliver that.

All the work that was done was focused on a 1 March delivery date. However, now, of course, we are looking at delivery in October 2025, with an entirely different set of legislation, which has yet to be defined. All the work that was done was to deliver the legislation as passed by this Parliament. Now, we have an entirely different scope, which is to deliver as yet unknown legislation—in October 2025, I hope, but, because the regulations have not yet been laid, we do not know that.

That is the situation. There has been a lot of water under the bridge since March, and we are in a different place now.

I will respond to that point, convener. It is not standard practice to publish gateway reviews, although that has been done on occasion during this project. I committed to the committee that I would respond with the findings of the review, and I have shared some of them with you today. That includes that the review identified significant blockers, such as the lack of a decision on IMA exclusion and the lack of a ruling on trading standards on shelf-edge labelling. I have also outlined our on-going work in that area. As the convener will recognise, there has been substantial change in the past three weeks and I would like the report on the findings to the committee to be up to date with the current context. Therefore, we will publish the findings and the response and will share those with the committee before recess.

That is an area of significant concern. As far as I understand it—Euan Page can keep me right—common frameworks existed before Brexit but have become even more important as we deal with the complexities of the internal market act. If we no longer have that mechanism, and the UK Government can impose restrictions that are based on the 2020 act more or less on a whim and without proportionality, evidence or impact assessments, I do not know where that leaves us in relation to our being able to work together as nations.

Perhaps Euan Page can add some detail.

I will need to turn to Euan Page for the answer to that question.

As far as I know, I am not able to discuss that matter. Ailsa Heine can give more information on that.

That is correct.

CSL is a private, not-for-profit company, which is industry-led and is designed to be funded by industry, so it would not be appropriate for the Scottish Government to fund the company. However, as we intend to go ahead with the scheme in 2025 and as the UK Government has said that it intends to go ahead with the scheme in 2025, there will be a need for a scheme administrator and a need to develop the expertise that we have already developed. It is now for producers in the UK at large to decide whether the smoothest path towards the implementation of a UK-wide DRS would be for them to keep CSL in continuity, which I would encourage them to do. Keeping CSL in continuity would allow that expertise to be brought to the delivery of a UK-wide scheme. It is up to the producers that currently fund CSL to decide on that.

There are two issues with counting on kerbside collection alone to meet the recycling targets. One is that kerbside collections are funded by local authorities, so they are funded by public money. The whole point of moving to the polluter pays principle is that the businesses that profit from damaging the environment, such as by the creation of litter, pay for preventing that damage. Across Government, we are moving to a polluter pays principle. The member will be familiar with the extended producer responsibility for packaging regulations that are being worked through on a common UK level towards making that polluter pays principle reality.

The other issue with kerbside recycling is practical. Kerbside recycling can only drive recycling levels up to about 64 per cent. With deposit return, we are looking at more like 90 per cent. Kerbside recycling for glass is what industry experts call “lossy”. Items need to be handled many times—put in to boxes, tipped into the back of trucks and otherwise handled—which means that up to 40 per cent of the glass is actually lost. Equally, because the glass can be contaminated, it is considered lower quality, so kerbside recycled glass generally is not recycled into bottles but goes into lower-quality stuff, such as aggregate for roads. The whole point of a deposit return scheme is that it increases not only the amount of recyclate, but the quality of that recyclate so that it can be fully circular and recycled back into glass bottles. That is the whole point of a deposit return scheme.