Chamber and committees

I will ask some questions around the UK Internal Market Act 2020 exclusion, and other members may want to come in on that issue as well. There are questions about process and who asked what and when, but I will start by asking the minister about scenario planning. If there is no exclusion under the internal market act, what will be the consequence? Have you planned for that?

It has been useful for us to get clarification on a number of areas this morning, but now I want to look forward. The scheme is ambitious, which is what the Parliament voted for. It would be unthinkable for there not to be some teething issues with the scheme’s operation after the August start. Has any thought been given to what those issues might be? Earlier, the minister mentioned that there will need to be continual analysis to ensure that there will be an adequate number of return points and that CSL will carry out that role. Can we anticipate any issues that might arise—in particular, on the basis of international comparisons—and how CSL might deal with them?

Does that suggest that there is no cliff-edge date? You spoke earlier about the somewhat dubious nature of the significance of particular cliff-edge dates. Is it sensible to have one?

This has been a very insightful and candid session. I want to go back to retained EU law for a moment. Philip Rycroft talked about the bill seeking to do the impossible, but we are where we are, I guess.

Professor Gallagher talked about the options and the imagination that needs to be applied by Administrations and the House of Lords on the way forward. I would like to hear your brief reflections on what might have been a better way forward on revising and making decisions about retained EU law. In the current bill, there has been what is, in effect, a carve-out of financial services. There are issues around the cliff edge and, perhaps, the phased examination of retained EU law. What would have been a better and more credible way forward? May I start with Philip Rycroft, please?

Have you advised the UK Government in relation to the Energy Bill and offshore wind mitigation?

If there is anything that you can forward to the committee on that matter, too, that would be very useful.

Yes—those are long-standing issues in relation to conservation.

I move on to questions around supply chains and consumption. It is good to see that the framework recognises that as an issue. Every time I buy clothing or food that has been imported, or even drive an electric car, the impact of that wider supply chain on the planet and biodiversity is always at the forefront of my mind. Do we have enough clarity at the moment about the impact of supply chains and consumption in Scotland? Is there transparency in corporate or Government reporting in that area?

Okay; feel free to come in on that.

Thanks for that point.