Chamber and committees

So, the message is that we need a much more in-depth and bigger survey. I think that we are all agreed on that. Who should do that? Is it best for the Government to do that, or should it be a third sector organisation?

The proposal is that redeterminations could be made after a year if there are “exceptional circumstances”. Are you comfortable with the concept of “exceptional circumstances” and what it means?

In practice, how common would it be that, after a year, a request for redetermination would not have been made?

We hope that the cost will not be huge, but I still think that the principle whereby we end up paying for both the new tax and the old levy is unfair. Was that point raised at all during the fiscal framework discussions last summer?

When you say that it is “under consideration”, does that mean that it could come in at stage 2?

Have there been any discussions with the UK Government about raising the whole-UK rate of £2 a tonne, which has been there for a long time, so that the whole of the UK, including Scotland, would do more recycling?

SEPA has been mentioned, and I understand that it is very much involved with landfill tax. Indeed, I know from my constituency experience that that is the case. However, it appears that SEPA does not have a formal role in relation to the bill. Can you say why that would be, or is it not necessary?

You have said once or twice that there would be consultation before the introduction of any regulations, which is good. However, I do not think that the bill says that there must be consultation.

Let us move on. The convener made the point that there was no consultation on part 2 of the bill. The committee has previously had evidence—when we looked at AI and other things—that there are risks with automation. For example, individuals might get caught out and make a minor infringement, but the system might send them a huge penalty, which might not happen if there was human intervention or human checks. What are the plans for automation, and can you assure us that there will still be a good level of human oversight?

The convener has asked you extensively about rates and so on. Witnesses have suggested that, whereas our builders in the central belt have a choice of whether to use recycled material or newly quarried material, the islands and more rural areas face a different situation. On an island or somewhere near Inverness, say, there is not the option of using recycled material, which might suggest that we could have different rates in different parts of Scotland. There might be a higher rate in Glasgow, for instance, where recycled material could be used, but there might be a lower rate in the Western Isles, where that may not be possible. Is that being considered?