Chamber and committees

In the financial memorandum, do you agree with the cost estimates? To meet the targets, there will need to be investment in infrastructure—that could be in the form of vehicles, recycling centres, community recycling centres and reuse opportunities. There will also need to be revenue expenditure and staff-related investment. However, three local authorities have a recycling rate that is below 30 per cent and only 12 local authorities achieve a rate that is above 50 per cent at the moment. That is a huge gap. How do you bridge that gap, financially?

It has been good getting your evidence. In its written submission, COSLA said that the financial memorandum vastly underestimates the cost for local authorities and overestimates the potential income. That was reinforced by the first witness panel today. Can we get your views from the ground? What would be your asks in order to meet higher recycling targets and to link into the wider net zero and sustainable development goals that were mentioned in your written evidence? May we go to Glasgow first?

Silke Isbrand put up her hand.

Okay. That is very much appreciated, convener.

I have a question for Gail Macgregor about the estimates in the financial memorandum. There has been a lot of talk about the need for investment. Do you agree with the estimates? Given the huge variation in local authorities’ current recycling rates—I think that three have a rate that is below 30 per cent and 12 have a rate that is above 50 per cent—where will the capital and revenue expenditure come from to invest in best practice?

That is very helpful, thanks. Brydon Gray, do you have a view from Shetland?

That is very useful. The challenge is how that actually happens if this piece of legislation is to be successfully implemented.

You have mentioned compliance and awareness, which several people have raised today. What are the challenges and the opportunities in respect of the financial memorandum? I think that the money must be spent upfront before any income comes in. I do not know whether either Gail Macgregor or Rhona Gunn wants to come in on their estimates of the gap between expenditure and income.

That is very useful to get on the record. I visited a local authority and saw its fantastic new infrastructure. However, it had to fund that. Its comment was, “If everybody needs this infrastructure, we will need the supply chains and we will need the investment.” That is not in the local authority budget, so the Scottish Government will need to step in. Thanks for your feedback.

That is very helpful, that idea about clarity for supply chains and investment. I suppose the challenge is how you use the opportunity of this legislation and the discussions around it to get that. Thank you very much.

My question is about accountability and consumer protection. Heat networks are being developed; I have visited ones in Clydebank and Midlothian that are owned by the council but operated through a private partnership approach, so there is accountability for the residents. By contrast, Edinburgh has dozens of heat networks; they are not run by the council, but they are also not for residential properties as a rule. As the approach is rolled out, it raises a critical issue about accountability and consumer protection—and not just in the short term. When the source of energy shifts, you will need accountability with regard to costings. How is that consumer protection issue feeding into these regulations?

I guess that it comes back to Mark Ruskell’s point about municipal ownership and how critical councils are to the planning process. After all, as far as housing is concerned, whether it be new or old, councils have, as you say, the knowledge. Is there not an accountability issue here? Should we not be focusing on those council leadership approaches? Does the public-private approach not provide that accountability rather than the private route that you have mentioned?

I just wanted to highlight that, at last week’s meeting, I asked about Scottish Water using its renewables infrastructure for income generation. To what extent does that infrastructure give it additional income that might help keep household bills down? I know that it is a short question on quite a complex issue.