Chamber and committees

The Executive expects that Scottish Water will deliver a £1.8 billion modernisation programme aimed at improving drinking water quality, creating a cleaner environment and improving services at least cost to its customers.

Five infraction cases against the UK are relevant to management of waste in Scotland:Waste Framework Directive (1975/442/EEC & 1991/156/EC). A Reasoned Opinion under Article 226 of the EC Treaty was received in July 2001 and the Commission took the decision to refer the case to the European Court of Justice in June 2002. Landfill Directive (1999/31/EC). A Reasoned Opinion was received in April 2002 and the Commission took the decision to refer the case to the European Court of Justice in June 2002.Hazardous Waste Directive (91/689/EEC). A Reasoned Opinion was received in July 2001 and the Commission took the decision to refer the case to the European Court of Justice in June 2002.Waste Oils Directive (75/439/EEC). A Reasoned Opinion was received in November 2001 and the Commission took the decision to refer the case to the European Court of Justice in June 2002.End of Life Vehicles Directive (00/53/EC). A Reasoned Opinion was received in October 2002.As these matters are the subject of legal proceedings it would not be appropriate to comment further. The Scottish Executive is unable to estimate when these proceedings will come to an end. In addition, the European Court of Justice ruled, on 24 January 2002, that the UK's waste management plans in 1999 were not adequate to comply with relevant provisions of the Waste Framework, Hazardous and Packaging Wastes Directives.

The National Waste Strategy sets out the framework for making a significant change in the way that Scotland deals with its waste. Making this change will not be easy. The Executive has allocated over £230 million to the Strategic Waste Fund to assist local authorities implement the area waste plans that are currently being finalised.However, finance will not be the only issue faced by local authorities. The area plans will highlight the new waste facilities that will be required in future years. Planning authorities will be expected to take account of these needs in revising development plans, identifying areas where such facilities may be appropriate in land use terms. Increased recycling will also require new markets for the materials recovered. The Executive is supporting a number of initiatives to encourage the use of these materials and to develop markets so that there they have a value and recycling becomes more viable.

We received 463 responses to the draft consultation document. An analysis of these responses is contained in the annex to the report submitted to the Parliament in accordance with the provisions of section 6 (6) of the National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000. A copy of the report and annex can be obtained from the Parliament's Reference Centre (Bib. number 25236).

It was necessary to strike a balance between the desirability of including certain areas for their natural heritage importance and the need to establish a park with a coherent identity.Information on the scores accorded by Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) are contained in Annex D to the SNH Report A new way of caring for a special place. A copy of the report can be obtained through the SNH website, which can be found at http://www.snh.org.uk/.

The Scottish Executive has no functions in relation to the landfill tax. The Chancellor of the Exchequer recently announced the UK Government's intention to consult on a proposal to increase the landfill tax escalator. He also announced changes to the landfill tax credit scheme to take effect from 1 April 2003. Around £100 million in 2003-04, rising to £110 million in 2004-05 and 2005-06, will be allocated to public spending to encourage sustainable waste management. The Executive expects the normal Barnett formula to be used in allocating funds to the Scottish Assigned Budget as a result of this announcement.

There are no scientific grounds to suggest that the GM crops grown in farm trials in Scotland pose a different health risk to local populations than that posed by conventional crops. However, we maintain a watching brief in this area and, should emerging scientific evidence support a change in this position, we will reconsider the need to implement an appropriate, effective and evidence-based health surveillance programme.I am acutely aware of the need to maintain vigilance and have effective monitoring systems with regard to new and emerging hazards to health from whatever source they might originate.

The precautionary principle is applied where a scientific assessment has identified the possibility of harmful effects from a particular action or where there is ambiguity.The GM crops that have been released in field trials in Scotland have been subjected to a thorough scientific risk assessment prior to their release. There is no ambiguity in the scientific advice to ministers that these crops do not pose a threat to either human health or the environment. If any such evidence was to emerge, we would have no hesitation in withdrawing consent for the release and halting the field trials.

No. The farm-scale evaluations offer an opportunity to collect valuable ecological information that will better inform future decision taking. The expert advice is clear that these evaluations can be conducted without threatening human health or the environment. As such, the Executive's support for the evaluation programme is seen as a sensible and precautionary approach to this issue.

Professor Grant and the steering board that is leading this element of the public debate are currently preparing a detailed programme deploying the considerable amount of public funding that has been made available for this purpose. The Scottish Executive and the other UK administrations are committed to a meaningful debate that gets to the root of what matters to the public about the issues raised by the possible commercialisation of GM crops. We believe that the budget that has been provided is commensurate with this aim. The conclusions of the debate will be invaluable in assisting ministers when the results of the current farm-scale evaluations are considered and when future decisions on possible commercialisation need to be taken.