Chamber and committees

Thanks, convener.

To go back to the issue of targets, I appreciate the complexity and difficulty of bringing forward targets. In some cases, it is not always appropriate to put targets in primary legislation, but do you have a clear timescale for when targets could be brought in through secondary legislation? Is there a sense of when they could be brought in?

Good morning. The Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill is a framework bill, on the back of which will come regulations. The minister has already mentioned potential regulations on disposable coffee cups. I will ask about the parliamentary process for that.

In the previous session of Parliament, the super-affirmative procedure was used in relation to the original deposit return scheme regulations that went through Parliament. The use of an enhanced procedure such as that gives stakeholders an additional opportunity to come in and give evidence to committees. With regard to decision making around the regulatory procedure in the bill, was the use of the super-affirmative procedure considered as an option?

I suppose that it depends on how strong the consensus is in the industry on certain measures.

We need to get the economic benefit—£62 million-worth of food—on the record. If one sector has already gone down that route, it is quite tantalising to think about other sectors that could and what the benefits of that could be.

I have a couple of questions. The first is about fair work. It is good to see fair work principles embedded into the strategy, but I am interested in how you extend those fair work principles to businesses that you work with and organisations that are getting grant in aid.

Has there been any pushback on that?

I will use Stirling castle as an example to ask about transport planning. It has a very small car park. It is tempting to drive into the centre of town and up to the castle, but there are other options. Would you be working with Stirling Council to plan the management of tourism, bearing in mind the historic nature of Stirling city centre?

My final question is about how you are engaging with marginalised groups. You have your membership, cardholders and, I am sure, school visits and other visits to attractions, but there will be groups of people in Scotland who have not connected with the assets and who do not feel able to. There will be other groups such as new Scots, who might also struggle to engage. I am interested in how you are ensuring that the benefits of our national heritage and assets are felt by everybody in Scotland, including those who might not visit an asset for a whole range of reasons, including income.

Last week we spoke quite a bit about climate change, which is obviously a key aspect of the strategy. You have already mentioned heat in buildings, fabric first approaches and so on. I want to pick up on another area: less on direct emissions and more on the emissions that come from visitors and heritage tourism. I am interested to know what work you are doing to address some of that, perhaps in partnership with local authorities, national park authorities or other bodies. We have heard that Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park Authority wants to set up mobility hubs to encourage tourists to arrive in the park and take a sustainable transport option to go on to a visitor attraction. How are you embedding that partnership approach, working with councils and others to drill down on unnecessary emissions?

Is it fair to say that that approach has brought some focus and ambition rather than requiring specific changes in the waste management area?