Official Report 422KB pdf
Private and Public Water Supplies (Miscellaneous Amendments) (Scotland) Regulations 2015 (SSI 2015/346)
Climate Change (Duties of Public Bodies: Reporting Requirements) (Scotland) Order 2015 (SSI 2015/347)
Agenda item 2 is to consider two negative instruments. As members will recall, the committee has agreed as part of its work programme to write to public sector bodies regarding their experiences of reporting in the trial year, with a view to considering the issue as part of its legacy work in early 2016. I refer members to paper RACCE/S4/15/34/1. Are there any comments?
I want to comment on the Private and Public Water Supplies (Miscellaneous Amendments) (Scotland) Regulations 2015. I declare an interest in that I used to have a private water supply—I know that other committee members have private water supplies—and I represent quite a number of people who have private water supplies, which are quite common in rural Scotland.
I would like to have answers on four issues, which we could perhaps seek from the Scottish Government. First, who will be affected? Our briefing document talks about businesses being affected, but I want to know about how individuals will be affected, because I suspect that many individuals will be affected. Secondly, who was consulted? The document speaks of local authorities being consulted. I want to know whether individual users were consulted. Thirdly, what is the total number of extant private water supplies in Scotland? That is important. Finally, what resources are available to help people who have private water supplies to adapt in the light of the proposed changes?
For example, although I do not think that it is terribly onerous to filter a private water supply, I suspect that it is very difficult to remove radon from such a supply. I presume that in circumstances where radon is found, the private supply has to cease. In that case, people would then have to connect to the mains, which, in some cases, would be impossible; in other cases, that would be extremely expensive. We need more information about the regulation. I was told that the minister would not be responding on the issue, but as she has responsibility for private water supplies, she now knows the questions that will be asked. Perhaps we could get information on them.
We will write to the minister about that.
I am delighted that the committee will write to the minister about the regulation. On radon in particular, we perhaps need her reassurance about the decision that a threshold will not be phased as Scottish Water has asked for it to be.
My question is on the Climate Change (Duties of Public Bodies: Reporting Requirements) (Scotland) Order 2015.
We will come to that order in a moment. There are no more questions on SSI 2015/346 on water supplies, and we will write to the minister about the points that have been raised.
We will move on to SSI 2015/347, on climate change reporting requirements for public bodies.
My question is in relation to the financial effects of the SSI. The business and regulatory impact assessment for SSI 2015/347 says that
“No significant additional financial impact is foreseen as most of these bodies already report broadly equivalent information on a voluntary basis.”
I was surprised by that because I know—from evidence that we have taken and from having represented the committee as an observer on the public sector climate leaders forum—that some listed public sector bodies are much further down the road on reporting than others. The costs of catching up might have significant implications.
Also, as the committee heard previously when we were taking evidence, the cost of peer assessment could well be somewhat onerous—especially for some of the smaller bodies that are listed. I would like those points to be raised.
To follow on from that point, clearly a lot of lessons have been learned from the voluntary efforts of the public sector agencies that have started to address the issue. Having been to a public sector climate leaders forums on behalf of the committee as substitute for Claudia Beamish and after hearing evidence to the committee, it struck me that there is a lot of best practice—the challenge is to make it standard practice right across the public sector.
There is a particular challenge about organisations’ transport footprints. A lot of the organisations have a big opportunity to change not just how staff deliver services but how they get to work. That point came up after hearing from a couple of the witnesses. The police, for example, did not really see how it would affect them, but other big organisations—in particular, local authorities—have thousands of staff arriving every day, so their carbon footprint would be quite substantial.
We need to learn lessons from the organisations that have put in place transformative policies that have worked. We also need to think about the organisations that are bringing up the rear and how to get the best impact from them. It is really important that we think about the lessons to be learned and the leadership issues to be communicated.
As there are no other points from members on those items, is the committee agreed that it does not wish to make any recommendations on the instruments?
Members indicated agreement.
Thank you. We will write to the minister about the points that have been raised.