Chamber and committees

Specifically, how do the constraints around financial transactions limit what you are able to support?

Thanks very much. I am sure that we can return to that issue, convener.

No. So, this is all about Israel, is it not? That is exactly what the whole debate and the legislation are about: they are about Israel, which, for some reason, is being singled out by campaigners when all those other repressive regimes are being ignored. Over the past few weeks, particularly since 7 October, we have seen a dramatic rise in antisemitic activity. I have certainly spoken to members of the Jewish community in Glasgow who say that they have never experienced such a hostile environment as the one that they are experiencing today. They feel unsafe in Scotland. You will have read the submission, I am sure, from the Scottish Council of Jewish Communities, which shows overwhelming support for the bill and which opposes the action that the Scottish Government is taking. Are you not concerned that, in opposing the bill, the perception will be that you are giving succour to antisemitic sentiments when, you should instead be giving reassurance to the Scottish Jewish community, given that it feels more threatened than it has done at any point in the past 40 years?

Good morning, minister and colleagues. I have a number of short questions, and I hope that we will get short answers.

First, minister, would you accept that international affairs and matters of international trade are reserved to the UK Parliament?

Thank you. In your memorandum, at paragraph 20, you refer to the UK Government: which UK Government are you referring to?

I am genuinely confused by this. I did a little simple research and found that, for example, Margaret Thatcher’s Government condemned apartheid on a number of occasions. Famously, Margaret Thatcher, when she met Archbishop Desmond Tutu, condemned apartheid. She condemned apartheid in 1984 during a visit to the United Kingdom by P W Botha, the South African leader. The UK Government was also involved in sanctioning South Africa, so I am not entirely sure what that paragraph refers to.

Thank you.

Good morning, panel. I have a particular interest in fly-tipping, on which I am preparing a member’s bill. I very much welcome section 10, on the enhanced duty on householders; that is good progress.

I have three fly-tipping questions on which I would like your view; I will ask them together. First, we know that fly-tipping is serious and that it is as much an urban issue as it is a rural issue. There is concern about the level of fixed-penalty notices, which is currently set at £200. There is nothing in the bill suggesting that that should be increased, but the Scottish Government’s fly-tipping strategy, published in June, suggested increasing the fixed penalty to £500. I am interested to get your views on whether that would be a sufficient deterrent or not.

Secondly, when I ran my consultation on fly-tipping, people responded very strongly that the more barriers we put in the way of the legal disposal of waste, the more we were likely to drive up rates of fly-tipping. If councils are, for example, reducing access to recycling centres, as many are currently doing due to budgetary issues, will that see more fly-tipping? I would be interested in your views on that.

Thirdly, and lastly, is there anything that is not in the bill that would be useful to you when it comes to trying to address the problem of fly-tipping?

Thank you. I have a follow-up question for you, David. You talked about problems with enforcement, which I appreciate, and about resourcing. If we were to increase the level of penalties, would it be helpful if there were some mechanism whereby you could ring fence that money, so that it went back into better enforcement, for example, to be more resource for your team?

Thank you, convener. Yes, I have a particular interest in fly-tipping. I have a member’s bill in preparation on the issue and I welcome in particular section 10 of the bill, which places an enhanced duty of care on the householder.

I will ask two questions, convener, but I will ask them at the same time, if that is all right. A lot of the questions that I would have asked have already been covered.

I will direct my first question to Councillor Macgregor from COSLA. Fixed penalty notices currently sit at £200, and I think that we all accept that is nowhere near the level that it needs to be to act as a deterrent. In its strategy—although it is not in the bill—the Scottish Government is suggesting increasing the penalty to £500. Is that enough, and is there some mechanism whereby the money raised could be recycled into greater enforcement? How practical is it to try to ring fence money raised from fixed penalty notices to deal with the resource issue?

My second question goes back to what Drew Murdoch was just saying. When I ran my consultation on fly-tipping, one of the biggest issues that people raised with me was how restrictions on access to recycling centres were one of the drivers of fly-tipping. We have seen councils, usually because of budgetary conditions, reducing opening hours in recycling centres, closing them entirely or introducing queuing or appointment systems. That is not in any way an excuse for people fly-tipping, but you can see why—human nature being what it is—if you make it more difficult for people to legally dispose of material, they are more likely to fly-tip. To what extent is that a factor?