Chamber and committees

I do not agree with the member’s representation that small businesses will be disproportionately impacted. The measures that we have put in place have been designed to support small producers in particular. I can go through them again. One of the measures that we have put in place to support small producers is proportionate producer fees, so that small producers will pay the same as large producers, proportionally, because the fee is charged per container. There are, similarly, cash flow measures specifically to help small producers.

When it comes to our small retailers, the fees that will be paid for operating manual return points are the highest in the world for small retailers: our small retailers who operate manual return points will be better off than their compatriots around the world. With our scheme, we are doing more for small businesses than other highly successful schemes around the world are doing. Therefore, I do not agree at all with the member’s representation of the scheme.

Absolutely. The scheme, as it will look on 16 August, will probably look quite different 18 months down the line. When these sorts of schemes launch, there is a first stage—what we call the cut-over period—that is always challenging. In this case, most of what you have in your house, most of the litter in the streets and so on will not at that point be scheme articles. If, after 16 August, you do your citizen’s duty by picking up a can at the side of the road and taking it to a return point, the can will be rejected. It will not be a scheme article because it was sold before the date.

During the cut-over period, some scheme articles will be in circulation; however, quite a lot of material that is not scheme articles will be in circulation, too, and it will take a number of weeks for scheme articles to become predominant. A big part of what we have to manage, therefore, is the ramp-up into the scheme. There are tried and tested ways of doing that, and there are learnings that we can take from other countries. It will be a challenging period, and our communications to consumers must be clear so that customers understand why the bottle that they bought on 17 August can be returned whereas the one that they bought on 15 August cannot.

That is definitely challenging for us to manage, because we all want people’s first experience of the scheme to be a positive one. We want them to have their bottle accepted, to get their 20p back and to spend that on their shopping or whatever they wish. The cut-over period will be absolutely critical.

Moreover, as those materials gradually ramp up, we will be able to see consumer behaviour. It goes back to the convener’s earlier point: does the consumer tend to bring things back to the big shops, or do they use a mix of small and large shops? How does it work? Biffa and Circularity Scotland will have to be very reactive and dynamic, and we will be working with them on processes and mechanisms that will allow them to deal with any small business that says, “Oh my goodness—my bins are full! Biffa, come and get them,” and to be able to update things so that people can say, “Do you know what? I thought that we were going to get 10,000 items a week back, but we’re getting only 3,000. We need to adjust our schedule.”

There will have to be a period of adjustment and optimisation as the scheme settles in, and, as a result, I would expect what you have suggested to be the case. I expect that communities will tell us, “We have no return point that’s convenient for us. How can we get things collected?” We will have to be dynamic in addressing those sorts of issues. It is my intention, therefore, to facilitate some sort of reaction force so that people and businesses know whom to call when their bins are overflowing or they cannot return things and so that there is a process by which people can find out how to get their 20p back.

The scheme will ramp up and adapt to things over the first year. In fact, the recycling targets that we have set will come into effect after a year—or perhaps two years; I will see whether that needs to be corrected—in recognition of the fact that we will not have 90 per cent recycling on day 1. As the scheme beds in, we will work towards that 90 per cent recycling target.

We already know that 95 per cent of materials, by volume, are signed up to the scheme. The way to counteract any risk is to bring all producers online so that they can continue to sell in Scotland. All the measures that we are using to support producers to sign up to the scheme, including cash-flow measures, labelling measures and any further measures that we agree with them, are meant to do exactly that—to allow that variety of producers to continue to sell in Scotland.

The labelling measure is of particular interest when it comes to the importation of wines. It was a specific ask from our wine importers, because you can imagine the difficulty if they were importing only 500 bottles of wine from a winery in France. They would not want to have to put a Scottish label on that number of bottles, which is quite reasonable. That is exactly the kind of situation for which the labelling measure was designed. Our estimate is that about 15,000 products will use the sticky label solution.

It is absolutely not the vision that our products will be restricted. We are working to continue to have a wide variety of products on the market.

That is no problem. I will tackle both of Jackie Dunbar’s questions.

The Scottish biodiversity strategy ties in with other strategies. It is essential that biodiversity considerations are mainstreamed in all our policy development, and that is one of our key aims. Given the breadth of matters that the Government deals with, there is a wide range of strategies and plans to address issues in particular sectors. The biodiversity strategy provides a clear vision and set of outcomes that all of our policies must help to achieve. The environment strategy for Scotland presents a whole-of-Government approach to tackling the climate and nature crises by creating an overarching framework for Scotland as well as strategies and plans on the environment and climate change, and by strengthening the connections between environmental policies and policies across Government. It helps us to identify priorities and opportunities and to drive the transformative change that we need.

We know that healthy biodiversity underpins our prosperity, wellbeing and ability to reach net zero. I know that all the committee members are aware, because of the evidence that you have taken, that we need to mainstream this piece. Tackling biodiversity cannot be done in a silo; it needs to be done across all of society.

Specifically on wild salmon, they are an indicator species, so things that we do to protect wild salmon will also protect other species that have similar life cycles or share their natural environment, such as those that Jackie Dunbar mentioned.

As members will know, wild salmon are in decline. In response to the decline of those populations, in January 2022 we published Scotland’s wild salmon strategy, which is a collective vision for flourishing populations of wild Atlantic salmon. In that, we set a high level of ambition and a direction of travel. We followed up the strategy with an implementation plan, which was published last month, and which sets out more than 60 actions that we will take over the next five years to protect and restore salmon populations. The strategy and plan were developed in close collaboration with stakeholder groups, including representatives from Government, NGOs and agencies. We are clear that positive outcomes can be achieved only through a co-ordinated and collaborative approach.

I have been lucky enough to visit some of the nature restoration work that is being done along some of the rivers, such as removing weirs and, where the weirs cannot be removed, putting in passes to allow the salmon past, and of course those will apply to other species as well.

I want to mention another great river restoration project. One problem that some rivers in Scotland have is that they are too clean—there are no trees along the banks, there is nothing in the water, and they run too fast, too clear and too hot, because the sun shines on them all the time. This particular project takes fallen trees and embeds them in the riverbed. That not only slows the water but creates shaded spots and eddies where fish can spawn and invertebrates can breed. That is the kind of practical on-the-ground action on which the nature restoration fund is having an impact and that specifically targets those important species.

The matter of recovering and protecting vulnerable and important species is one of the five themes that the biodiversity strategy covers. The strategy has 26 actions that we are taking for nature, grouped into those five themes. Theme 4 is to recover and protect vulnerable species, and one of the actions there is to

“Revise the Scottish Biodiversity List of species and habitats that Scottish Ministers consider to be of principal importance for biodiversity conservation in Scotland”.

Perhaps Matthew Bird or Lisa McCann can add some detail on that process.

Thank you, convener, and thank you for inviting me here today to discuss the outcomes from COP15 and how we are integrating them into our biodiversity strategy. I know that you have already heard overwhelming evidence about the extent of the biodiversity crisis that we are facing here in Scotland and across the world, and about the importance of taking action now to tackle the decline in nature.

You have also heard about the historic Kunming-Montreal global biodiversity framework, which was agreed at the end of last year. That framework builds on a vision, which I hope you share, of a world that is living in harmony with nature and where, by 2050, biodiversity is valued, conserved, restored and wisely used, through maintaining ecosystem services.

As you are aware, I was honoured to attend COP15 with a small Scottish delegation, which culminated in our presenting the Edinburgh declaration to that conference’s high-level segment, on behalf of subnational bodies. As well as calling for a high-ambition outcome from the meeting in Montreal, the Edinburgh declaration also called for the critical role that subnational bodies play in addressing the biodiversity crisis to be recognised and allocated the necessary resources and powers to help to tackle it. I am delighted that the declaration was adopted at the conference and now forms part of the new global biodiversity framework.

The Scottish Government led the Edinburgh process at the request of the Convention on Biological Diversity’s secretariat, and I am very proud of the work that was done to promote it and to garner support for it. That work is demonstrated by the fact that, at the final count, the declaration had been signed by more than 300 subnational bodies from around the world.

Our draft biodiversity strategy was published to coincide with COP15, but it remained in draft form to allow us to take into account the new global biodiversity framework, thereby ensuring that we are meeting the global ambition. The strategy is where we set out our high-level vision for a nature-positive Scotland and our ambition to halt biodiversity loss by 2030 and reverse declines by 2045. I have often wondered whether that is ambitious enough; although there has been a huge amount of really positive activity across Scotland in recent years—for example our scaling up of peatland restoration and our groundbreaking nature restoration fund—it is clear that there is still a huge amount of work to do. The type of change that we need takes time, which is why it is even more important that we start taking action now.

We are currently refining the strategy and are now very much focused on developing the delivery plans that will sit underneath it. Those plans will be where we will set out how we are going to achieve our high-level vision and outcomes.

I was very grateful to the committee for the careful and detailed consideration that it gave to the draft biodiversity strategy last year. Your comments formed an important part of our consideration in developing the strategy and, as I set out when I wrote to the committee in December 2022, many of those points were incorporated in the final draft.

We are also starting to explore with our subnational partners the next steps on implementing the Edinburgh declaration and how best we can work together to really deliver on the new global framework. I welcome this discussion today and I appreciate the attention that the committee is giving to this important matter.

I would always say that they need more. Of course I would say that, because I am the minister for biodiversity. However, I can certainly outline some of our vision in this area.

The biodiversity strategy is a starting point. It sets out clearly what we need to achieve to halt and reverse biodiversity loss. It also provides us with the evidence that human activity has accelerated biodiversity decline. The member is therefore quite right: biodiversity needs to be mainstreamed across all our policy developments, our business practice and wider society. The Government cannot do this on its own. Nature does not belong to us, it belongs to everybody, every business and every person.

I am therefore working closely with other ministers to make sure that our collective policies will deliver the positive outcomes that we need. Some good examples of that are our national strategy for economic transformation, which, for the first time, recognises the importance of our natural capital as an asset to the country that we need to maintain.

Our vision for agriculture puts nature restoration at its heart, alongside climate mitigation and food security. It also recognises the importance of that sector in delivering for biodiversity, and that farmers and land managers are stewards of our land.

Interestingly, our national planning framework 4 and its supporting guidance have significantly greater emphasis on the importance of conserving our natural environment. I actually have an excerpt here, entitled “Developing with Nature guidance”. This is for anyone who is making a planning application, and it sets out very clear and quite practical steps by which people can take account of nature in a planning application. They can, for example,

“Apply the mitigation hierarchy ... Consider biodiversity from the outset”

and

“Take a place-based and inclusive approach.”

The guidance covers other practical things such as what plants are suitable as pollinators, how to plant a wildflower meadow and how to incorporate trees, scrub and woodland into developments. It is a really good example of mainstreaming, and anyone applying for planning permission for a development in Scotland has access to all that information. It even sets out how to incorporate homes for bees and bugs into development planning, how to manage water with nature and so on. It is an excellent example of mainstreaming that will make a difference as we go forward.

You have identified three very important areas—food, energy and housing—and that is exactly the kind of mainstreaming that we are considering. Reform of the agriculture subsidies is to do with environmental matters as well as food security. The different interests are not necessarily competing—agriculture is part of the solution to the climate crisis, and regenerative farming and crofting have an important role to play in how we do this while ensuring that the sector thrives. Those matters are dealt with under land reform and agricultural reform.

Energy and housing will come under the national planning framework, which contains clear guidance on having biodiversity built in as well as specific guidance on national development and the development guidance that I have just outlined. I think that we are well covered for biodiversity in those areas.

The phrase “zonal approach” has not come across my desk. However, ensuring that local communities are involved is important. With any investment in natural capital, we have to empower local communities. We cannot have a just transition through imposing things on communities; it needs to come from them. The convener is right in saying that we need to consider who is benefiting from land and how we invest in it. I am happy to take that away and consider it.

You are right to recognise the work of volunteers in protecting and restoring nature. Indeed, Matthew Bird and I went to the launch of the UK’s plant atlas, after an estimated 8,500 volunteers went around the UK, over a 20-year period, counting every flowering plant. It is an incredible achievement, and that is exactly the kind of data that we need in order to understand the challenges that native species—such as those at Langlands Moss—face and how at risk they are. Unfortunately, the plant atlas shows that our native species numbers have declined significantly, but introduced species numbers have increased significantly. You are absolutely right that the challenge is enormous, and protected areas make such a difference.

As I outlined to Jackie Dunbar, one of the streams in the biodiversity strategy, under actions, is to

“recover and protect vulnerable and important species.”

That is exactly the focus that we need. We need to manage existing and emerging pressures so that species can continue their recovery, and we should reintroduce species when that is needed.

Lisa McCann or Matthew Bird might have some specific information on newts.