Chamber and committees

I do not know. All that I am saying is that, if you can get a vape with a cheap battery that can be recharged a couple of times or one with an expensive battery that can be recharged 20 times, for example—I do not know whether those figures are even relevant—the one that can be recharged 20 times will cost more than the cheap one that can be recharged a couple of times. I want to ensure that we do not just move to an intermediate stage at which people throw away something that meets the definition and is cheaper.

David McPhee wants to come in.

Thank you, cabinet secretary. Jackie Dunbar has the first question.

Would the deputy convener like to ask a question or make a statement? The cabinet secretary will get a chance to answer all the points that have been raised at the end of the debate—or during it, if she wants to.

Does anyone else have any comments?

Cabinet secretary, do you want to comment on anything that you have heard?

The question is, that motion S6M-13568, in the name of Gillian Martin, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Motion agreed to,

That the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee recommends that the Environmental Protection (Single-use Vapes) (Scotland) Regulations 2024 [draft] be approved.

Welcome back. Agenda item 5 is consideration of another draft statutory instrument. I welcome Gillian Martin, the Acting Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy. She is joined by officials from the Scottish Government: Andrew Mackie, head of environment and forestry sponsorship hub; David McPhee, deputy director, circular economy; and Carolyn Boyd, a lawyer.

The instrument is laid under the affirmative procedure, which means that it cannot come into force unless the Parliament approves it. Following the evidence session, the committee will be invited, under the next agenda item, to consider a motion for the committee to recommend that the instrument be approved. I remind everyone that the Scottish Government officials will be able to speak under this item but not in the debate that follows.

I invite the cabinet secretary to make a short opening statement.

I have a final question. This is good news, as far as it reads, but my concern is that it would cost a massive amount of money to electrify the two most difficult railway lines—the one from Perth to Aberdeen and the one up to Inverness. We have seen the cost of electrification between Glasgow and Edinburgh, but those are the two lines that need most investment and most trains, because diesel trains are used to chug up there. If there is an open contract, surely people will go for the easy option and, yet again, Aberdeen and Inverness will be left on the sidelines with old trains—or will you ensure that that does not happen?

I hope that you are right. Inverness has often been last to get investment, whether it be in roads or rail, so it will be interesting to see what happens.

Thank you for making the announcement to the committee and for answering our questions. I will briefly suspend the meeting to allow for a change of witnesses.

Okay. Fine. Thank you for pointing that out to me. As you can imagine, I do not have time to look at my computer while I am trying to convene this meeting. I now know that there will be a GIQ, and the clerks will make sure that committee members get that.

I apologise for that interruption, and I thank members for pointing out that information, but the—