Official Report 365KB pdf
Feed (Sampling and Analysis and Specified Undesirable Substances) (Scotland) Regulations 2010 (SSI 2010/354)
Animal Feed (Scotland) Regulations 2010 (SSI 2010/373)
Under item 2, we have two negative Scottish statutory instruments to consider: the Feed (Sampling and Analysis and Specified Undesirable Substances) (Scotland) Regulations 2010 (SSI 2010/354) and the Animal Feed (Scotland) Regulations 2010 (SSI 2010/373). The Subordinate Legislation Committee has commented on the first of those instruments, and copies of the extract of its report that comments on the instrument have been issued to all committee members. No motions have been lodged to annul either of the instruments. Does the committee agree that it has no recommendations to make on the instruments?
I suspend the meeting for a short time to allow the minister to come to the table.
Waste Information (Scotland) Regulations 2010 (SSI 2010/Draft)
Item 3 is more subordinate legislation. We will take evidence on an affirmative instrument, the draft Waste Information (Scotland) Regulations 2010. On Monday, members were sent an extract from the Subordinate Legislation Committee’s report, which contained comments and correspondence on the instrument from that committee and the Scottish Government.
Good morning, everybody. The draft regulations introduce a statutory obligation on businesses, voluntary organisations and charities that are asked to do so by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency to provide information on waste. Failure to comply could result in summary proceedings being taken and the possibility of a fine of up to £5,000 being imposed, which is at level 5 on the standard scale.
Thank you, minister. I invite questions from members.
I have a comment rather than a question. I think that I moved the amendment that required the draft regulations to be brought before us within a year.
You will support the regulations, then.
I am very pleased to see that they have been brought before us within a year.
There is some concern about the meaning of the word “undertaking”. Can you explore that concept a little bit?
The definition that is given for the expression “undertaking” is kept deliberately broad so that it includes all private, public and voluntary sectors. There is a danger that, if we start to specify a tighter definition, we may lose some organisations from that. When we use such terms in their everyday sense, we all understand what they mean. To start to provide precise definitions of the private, public and voluntary sectors would not be as straightforward as it might at first appear. That is why the generic term “undertaking” has been used.
So there is nothing to worry about.
Absolutely nothing.
I find that reassuring. Thank you.
I have read the committee paper on the regulations and I am pleased to note that there will be no extra costs to voluntary and charitable organisations. However, under the heading “Competition Assessment”, the paper says:
Those organisations are already under a statutory obligation to compile that data. The reliance on entirely voluntary returns has proven to be rather ineffective. I think that I am right in saying that returns are slightly less than 17 per cent if they are left entirely voluntary. It is a sad comment, but without being backed up by some form of sanction, it looks as if people are not doing what they are meant to be doing.
Paragraphs 11 and 12 of the Executive note provide reassurance about the limited financial impact and say that the data are already required to be gathered. Do the regulations require base data that SEPA will marshal into whatever form it needs, or will there be a requirement on businesses and voluntary organisations to produce the information in a particular way, which for smaller companies and voluntary organisations could, I suspect, present a bit of a logistical challenge?
The organisations should already be compiling this information.
Indeed.
In that sense, the regulations do not represent anything particularly new. All that we are asking organisations and businesses to do is to be rather more assiduous about producing the information when they are asked.
So you are confirming that they need to gather baseline data and that they will not be required to do anything with it prior to forwarding it to SEPA.
There is nothing particularly extra to do. As I said, SEPA is developing a waste data strategy. It is as aware as anyone else of the need to keep regulation as clear and simple as possible. SEPA will ensure that the format of the data request is as straightforward to understand as it can be. It will do a test run of any forms devised for the purpose. A test run will be conducted with a sample of the businesses that will, in any case, be expected to react to such a request from time to time.
What use is being made of the information that those organisations are compiling at the moment?
I made it clear in my opening remarks that the information is required for three reasons. First, it is about informing us all, as policy makers, regulators and local authorities. If we are not aware of the reality of the waste streams that are out there, it is hard to make policy decisions that reflect accurately what is happening.
Would it be fair to say that you are inviting the industry to pay for information gathering for the Scottish Government, the European Parliament and business development?
You can characterise it like that if you wish, Mr Scott. In my view, that is an absurd way to describe what is happening. Every one of those organisations is already under a statutory obligation to compile that information. All we are asking them to do is to be in a position to hand it over. There is no point in compiling information that never gets used by anyone.
I think that those who regard waste as a business opportunity would normally be in the habit of paying for the information that they gather. That is all I am saying. If everyone is expected to give information, you are putting a potential cost of £10 million on an industry.
I remind members that we are talking about the private sector, the public sector and the voluntary sector. If we do not know what is going on out there in the area of waste, how on earth will we be able to plan things for the future? We have to be realistic about the kind of information that is required and how we use it. If we do not have the information, it is almost impossible to inform anything that we do in future. We had that debate during the progress of the 2009 act and Parliament was clearly of the view that regulations were required.
Thank you for your response.
There being no further questions, we move to item 4, which is the formal debate on the Waste Information (Scotland) Regulations 2010. I remind everyone that the officials cannot participate in the debate. I invite the minister to move the motion and to say anything else that she wishes to at this point.
That concludes the public part of today’s meeting. I thank everyone for their attendance.