Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee

Meeting date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019

Official Report 500KB pdf

---

Subordinate Legislation

---

Environmental Liability etc (EU Exit) (Scotland) (Amendment) Regulations 2019 (SSI 2019/276)

---

Environmental Protection (Cotton Buds) (Scotland) Regulations 2019 (SSI 2019/271)

The sixth item on our agenda is consideration of two negative instruments: the Environmental Liability etc (EU Exit) (Scotland) (Amendment) Regulations 2019 and the Environmental Protection (Cotton Buds) (Scotland) Regulations 2019. Does anyone have any comments on either?

On the environmental liability regulations, it would be useful to have some clarity on whether, if the regulations are used, the information is to be made public. It would also be useful to know whether the regulations are compliant with the Aarhus convention, which relates to public involvement in accessing environmental information and protecting the public’s rights to that information.

We can flag that up with the Scottish Government. However, the clerks have just directed me to paper 2, which mentions that point. Government officials said that

“the Scottish Ministers ... or the competent authority providing a notification under the new reporting requirements under the Environmental Liability (Scotland) Regulations 2009 ... would intend to make the information forming the subject of the report available publicly, as soon as reasonably practicable, after the provision of a report.”

Do you need any further clarification than that?

My first point is that that is not written into the regulations. It appears to be a policy position: the Government would prefer to release the information, but it is not written into the regulations. Secondly, we should ask whether the regulations, as drafted, are compliant with the Aarhus convention, which sets out specific requirements for the release of environmental information. It would be useful to find out what diligence has been done in relation to Aarhus.

Are you content for me to sign off a letter to the Scottish Government on that?

Yes.

I welcome SSI 2019/271, on cotton buds. It is a good step forward. As I started to read the regulations, I wondered what would happen to companies that manufacture cotton buds in Scotland, but it turns out that there are no such companies in Scotland. However, it was reassuring that a business and regulatory impact assessment had been carried out. That begs a question about what will happen as we work through the other SSIs that we will inevitably need to consider and which relate to something that is manufactured by companies in Scotland. They might lead to re-tooling or loss of jobs. I wanted to highlight that point.

Yes—in principle, we should be considering BRIAs.

We need to be aware of BRIAs.

I was out with Berwickshire marine conservation rangers at Coldingham yesterday, and we picked up loads of cotton buds and plastic straws. The problem is not just what people drop on the beach, but what comes in from the sea.

I wanted to make the same point, which is that we cannot be prescriptive about the products in relation to which regulation is recommended in future. Currently, we do not manufacture cotton buds in Scotland, so there is no financial implication for Scotland. However, Claudia Beamish is right to raise the point. We want to be a country that manufactures sustainable, environmentally friendly products, but without direction in regulations, how can we be sure that we are taking Scotland in the right direction? It is not something for inclusion in regulations, but perhaps there should be some guidance.

Are you content that the negative instrument is appropriate for cotton buds?

Yes, I am content. I just wanted to raise that point.

Okay, you have made that wider point.

Is the committee agreed that it does not wish to make any recommendations in relation to the instruments, other than to write to the Scottish Government to get Mark Ruskell’s points clarified?

Members indicated agreement.

Can I just check that we are agreeing to both sets of regulations?

Yes, we are.

With the agreement of the committee, when we write to the Scottish Government, we could highlight that, as these instruments come forward, if a BRIA shows that we have a manufacturer of a particular product in Scotland, the issue of support and advice for such a company should be considered. It would be valuable to highlight that.

Okay. Thank you. If there are no other comments, I will move on.

At our next meeting on 1 October, the committee will hear further evidence from stakeholders as part of our biodiversity inquiry. We will also consider two public petitions and the committee’s future work programme.

10:06 Meeting continued in private until 11:26.