Chamber and committees

That is helpful. I am also interested in the perception of Scotland in the Nordic Council of Ministers with regard to tackling climate change. As you will be aware, Scotland has some of the most ambitious climate change targets in the world, yet the delivery record is the polar opposite, unfortunately, with failure to meet emissions targets in three of the past four years. In fact, it was only a lockdown that allowed Scotland to meet its emissions targets. What are your thoughts on the perception of Scotland in tackling climate change?

Thank you. We have seen reports on Biffa’s environmental record. It was fined £1.5 million for illegally dumping waste abroad, with a judge describing its actions as “reckless, bordering on deliberate.” Has the minister raised any questions with Circularity Scotland on Biffa’s environmental record?

I will follow up some of Monica Lennon’s lines of questioning. I think that Mr Harris has mentioned twice that Circularity Scotland is in constant dialogue with Government. I have some questions about whether topics have been discussed to which I simply ask for a yes or no response—I will not ask you for any further details around what was discussed.

As Mr Jones has alluded to, Biffa has bought almost 200 vehicles to transport the deposit return containers. Those are not net zero; they are conventional petrol and diesel vehicles that are pumping out emissions. My simple question is: has the minister raised that issue with Circularity Scotland?

My intention was not to raise further issues about Biffa. However, as you have raised the tendering process, I will ask about waste collections. Is it not the case that the way in which the tendering process was run meant that only a large multinational business could feasibly win the bid?

Thank you. That is very helpful.

In your submission, you made a number of recommendations regarding reforms that you would like to be made to the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, including the statutory grounds on which market access principles can be disapplied. You also suggested that there is no reason why, in principle, devolved primary legislation should be subject to the subsidy control principles when UK primary legislation is not.

Could the reforms that you suggested be made in a way that would maintain the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 market access principles of mutual recognition and equal access to the same degree to which they are currently enshrined, or would implementing those changes involve a degree of watering down the principles, which could, in turn, impact the ability of Scottish businesses to trade freely and fairly with the rest of the UK?

In your submission, you also mention exemptions. There has been one exemption under single-use plastics, and that process took five months to conclude. There is now a more complicated exemption process around the Scottish deposit return scheme. Given that that process is more complicated and might therefore take longer to come to a conclusion, can you think of any reason why the Scottish Government waited until five months before the scheme’s launch date to formally ask for an exemption?

As a follow-up to that, in your submission, you mentioned that, if the UK Government declines to make an exemption around deposit return, it would be difficult to challenge that decision. What processes might the Scottish Government use to challenge that decision, if any are available?

Thank you for that. That is very helpful.

To pick up on your last point, do you think that that is largely down to capacity issues, or might institutional mechanism reform be helpful in that regard, in addition to increasing capacity?

Thanks. I am sure that that comment was for the committee as a whole.

I cannot see whether anyone else on the panel wants to say something. Are there any other comments?