Chamber and committees

Good morning, and welcome to the 28th meeting in 2023 of the Finance and Public Administration Committee. We have apologies from the deputy convener, Michael Marra. His substitute today is the former committee stalwart Daniel Johnson, whom I welcome back.

The first item on our agenda is to take evidence on the financial memorandum to the Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill from the Minister for Green Skills, Circular Economy and Biodiversity. I intend to allow up to 75 minutes for this evidence session. The minister is joined by Scottish Government officials. Ginny Gardner is head of the circular economy unit; Janet McVea is head of the zero waste unit; Alexander Quayle is team leader, recycling; and Gareth Heavisides is circular economy team leader. I welcome our witnesses to the meeting and invite the minister to make a short opening statement.

They cannot take those decisions if they do not have the resources to implement them, regardless of what they may wish to do. They are saying to us, “Look, we actually want to do what the Government suggests, but you cannae squeeze a quart into a pint pot.” The bottom line is that the resources are not being made available. Will the Scottish Government fully fund the bill? That is the issue in a nutshell.

Yes. As I mentioned, if those transfers are to be regular occurrences, they should probably be baselined into those portfolios in the first place.

On the technical adjustments, I know that there will not be any issue with the actual amount that we are able to spend in each portfolio, but the guide states:

“it is likely that the IFRS16 figures will be baselined into the 2024-25 budget, meaning that a direct comparison to starting budgets is not possible.”

One of the issues that the committee is concerned about is that, when we have our Punch and Judy show at stage 1 and stage 3 of the budget, people talk about different figures. Obviously, we on the SNP benches will denounce the evil Conservative Government for slashing our budgets, and the Conservatives will stand up to talk about how incredibly generous that same Government is and say that it has been lavishing us with ever greater record sums. Would it not be easier if figures were put together for the outturns, as we have asked for, to enable us all to sing from the same hymn sheet, at least on the figures that we are arguing over?

Another issue that came up in my questioning of Dundee City Council was that of co-design not just between local authorities and the Scottish Government but “with the market” as well. How would that work?

That would be very helpful. Local authorities would look forward to that, provided that it is additionality.

To go back to the financial memorandum, local authorities are still expressing concern about it. For example, Charlie Devine of Dundee City Council said:

“we need a lot more information … The financial memorandum is really helpful, because it gives us much more scope for where to think but, at the moment, it is not the finished article that we could give to Parliament to consider.”

Kirsty McGuire backed that up by saying:

“There is too much uncertainty, and there is not enough detail behind things at the moment.”—[Official Report, Finance and Public Administration Committee, 24 October 2023; c 11, 12.]

When it comes to scrutinising framework bills, we try to work with what we have in front of us, which is the financial memorandum, as do local authorities. You are not the only minister to come before us with a framework bill, but the problem that we have is that we see the can being kicked down the road a bit. Co-design and secondary legislation look great on paper, but if a local authority is looking to invest in recycling facilities, for example, it needs to know when to do that, what it is going to recycle, what will be included and what will not be included. If it is going to have to enforce legislation, it needs to be able to plan ahead for how it will fund that. The difficulty that local authorities have is that the financial memorandum does not appear to enable them to do that. For example, Kirsty McGuire said:

“Quite a bit of that is missing from the costs that we are looking at.”—[Official Report, Finance and Public Administration Committee, 24 October 2023; c 13.]

Another aspect is how much local authorities will have to spend to communicate those changes to the people in their areas.

I think that we all want to move forward with the legislation, but some of the local authorities are a bit more cautious than others. One question that has been asked is whether one size should fit all. If one size does not fit all, how do we ensure that we do not move at the pace of the slowest caravan, and that we achieve some of the changes that we want to make?

Thank you. I will bring colleagues in in a minute. You said that local authorities know where they are going, but they have said that they do not. For example, Jim Jack of West Lothian Council said:

“I am concerned about the future, what the journey will continue to look like for waste services, our ability to be light enough on our feet, and whether we will be funded to achieve what we need to achieve.”

They do not feel that they know where they are going.

Kirsty McGuire of South Lanarkshire Council said:

“Until we know what our service will look like, we will not know what we are applying for funding for.”

They are in a cleft stick: they are looking for additional resources to deliver the bill, but because it seems to be a moveable feast, they are not sure what they are applying for money for. Kirsty McGuire also said:

“if glass had been included in the scheme, there would have been an opportunity for us to make some efficiencies because glass is about 60 per cent of the material that we collect in our container bin, which is for glass, plastics and cans.”—[Official Report, Finance and Public Administration Committee, 24 October 2023; c 8.]

A lot of councils were geared up for the deposit return scheme, but that has changed significantly. Although you are telling us that things seem to be going well, we have not really heard that in the feedback that the witnesses have given us as part of our scrutiny.

The first colleague to come in will be Michelle Thomson.

I am a bit astonished that the 100 per cent collection figure is based on the fact that people should pay fines. People should not break the law in the first place, but we have to deal with reality.

I know that it has been a long session so far, minister, but, just to finish off, I want to refer to a couple of points that you have made in the evidence that you have given us.

In your responses to Ross Greer and me, you referred to the £88.4 million that Zero Waste Scotland estimates that the cost will be to enable all 32 Scottish local authorities to align with the existing code of practice. With regard to paragraph 48 of the financial memorandum, the deputy convener asked witnesses at our meeting on 24 October whether they were aware of any discussions between colleagues in their local authorities and either Zero Waste Scotland or the Scottish Government about where that figure had come from and whether that detail had been set out. Charlie Devine of Dundee City Council and Kirsty McGuire of South Lanarkshire Council both said, “No”. Although the figure has been set out, our local authority colleagues do not seem to understand where it has come from. Can you explain how Zero Waste Scotland came up with the figure, given the fact that it does not appear to have engaged with local authority colleagues in producing it?