The next item of business is consideration of a Parliamentary Bureau motion. I ask Joe FitzPatrick to move motion S4M-10139, on approval of a Scottish statutory instrument.
Motion moved,
That the Parliament agrees that the Single Use Carrier Bags Charge (Scotland) Regulations 2014 [draft] be approved.—[Joe FitzPatrick].
Alex Fergusson has indicated that he wishes to speak against the motion. You have up to three minutes, Mr Fergusson.
17:32
Thank you, Presiding Officer.
Having opposed the draft Single Use Carrier Bags Charge (Scotland) Regulations 2014 when they came before the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee last week, I think that it is only right that I explain to the Parliament why I took that action.
I very much share the Government’s desire to reduce litter and indeed to reduce the use of single-use carrier bags, as do my colleagues, but I simply do not accept that the draft regulations will bring about those laudable aims. We have been assured that they are evidence based, but I have asked myself several times on what evidence they are based, because much of the evidence seems to me to be conflicting.
In Ireland, it was claimed that the use of plastic carrier bags fell markedly—indeed, by up to 90 per cent—following the introduction of similar legislation, yet the demand for plastic film rose by more than 30 per cent to some 29,000 tonnes as consumers turned to different types of plastic carriers for their convenience. In Wales, the use of paper bags also fell dramatically following legislation, but paper bag usage is now back to the same level that it was at before the legislation was introduced. Those evidence bases have apparently been largely ignored by the Scottish Government.
My main concern lies in the field of food safety. I believe that the Government is wrong to include in the regulations carrier bags for the fast food and food-to-go sectors. There is evidence that the single paper biodegradable bag in which people receive and transport carry-out meals can actually help to reduce litter by acting as a receptacle for all the various individual items of packaging that such a meal requires. Those bags will not and indeed should not be reused, and some valid concerns are being aired that show that the reuse of any bags for edible food purposes, especially hot food, carries real health risks.
If that is not enough, I hope those members who represent Kirkcaldy are aware that Smith Anderson of Kirkcaldy, which is a major supplier of paper bags to both Burger King and McDonald’s, estimates that the legislation would cost as many of 40 jobs out of its workforce.
I do not believe that the measure will reduce litter or the overall demand for plastic. There is a real risk of reduced food safety by including the food-to-go sector, and I, for one, do not want 40 jobs to disappear in Kirkcaldy as a result of the legislation.
You need to bring your remarks to a close.
I hope that I am wrong about the measure, but the evidence that I have seen suggests that I will not be.
17:35
I will respond to the Conservatives’ objection to what I believe will be one of Parliament’s most progressive environmental policies. I am disappointed by Alex Fergusson’s stance but not surprised that the Conservatives have chosen to try to block a good environmental measure.
As I told the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee last Wednesday, Scotland uses about 750 million single-use carrier bags a year—every year—from supermarkets alone, which is more per head than anywhere else on these islands. The committee agreed with me by a margin of eight to one that it is time to take action to reduce the number of those bags that are given out.
That is part of our wider work to tackle Scotland’s litter problem. Carrier bags are a highly visible and damaging part of that problem in our communities, by our roadsides and particularly in our seas.
Placing a value on bags challenges the throwaway society. We want to promote the reuse of bags and other items in our society, to help get the most out of our increasingly limited resources and to cut carbon emissions.
The regulations are designed to offer a proportionate response. We have been careful to ensure that the administration will be as light touch as possible, particularly for small businesses.
The regulations will impose a requirement to charge, not a tax. Shoppers will be able to avoid the charge by bringing their own bags to the shops.
It is clear that there is support for the measure from many retailers, their customers and environmental organisations. Last year’s consultation received a strong response in favour of the charge and we have had constructive dialogue with all stakeholders during the process. I believe that the public support the measure. An opinion poll from Keep Scotland Beautiful just last week indicated strong public support—of those questioned, the number in favour of the charge was almost two to one.
Charges that are similar to our proposal are working well in Wales and Northern Ireland. Even the United Kingdom Government is set to introduce a charge in England. The Scottish Government’s proposals are coherent and thorough. Mr Fergusson and his colleagues would have us make our proposals less coherent and less thorough, rather like what the UK Government is doing.
The proposals from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to exempt paper and biodegradable bags have been roundly criticised by the Westminster Environmental Audit Committee, in contrast to the Welsh scheme, which is in line with our proposals. That committee said:
“Exemptions for small retailers and paper and biodegradable bags make it confusing for consumers, potentially harmful for the recycling industry, and less effective than the Welsh scheme, where bag use has been reduced by over 75% with a straightforward 5p charge on all disposable carrier bags.”
It is time for Scotland to take action on the issue. I urge members to back the regulations.
The question on the motion will be put at decision time.
The next item of business is consideration of a further Parliamentary Bureau motion. I ask Joe FitzPatrick to move motion S4M-10140, on the suspension of standing orders.
Motion moved,
That the Parliament agrees that, for the purpose of allowing the Justice Committee to start consideration of the Courts Reform (Scotland) Bill at stage 2 on 10 June 2014, Rule 9.5.3A of Standing Orders be suspended.—[Joe FitzPatrick.]
The question on the motion will be put at decision time.
Previous
Business MotionsNext
Decision Time