No, but I did.

Thank you, cabinet secretary. That was an interesting announcement, and I am sure that members will be considering the questions that they want to put on it when they come to the end of the first lot of questions that we have already discussed.

I also need to make an apology, as it was remiss of me, when welcoming the Government officials, not to welcome our colleague Graham Simpson, who will be asking questions at the end of the session. Please accept my apologies if I appeared to ignore you, Graham—you were not ignored.

Douglas Lumsden will ask the first question.

I say at the outset that there are a lot of moving parts in the regulations. We have heard from all the committee members about the difficulties of identifying the different types of vapes and whether they are reusable or single use.

What would concern me more than anything else is if not everyone in the United Kingdom went forward with the approach on 1 April next year. That would cause me grave concern. However, as an individual, I am perfectly happy to support this on the basis that everyone will move forward on the same date.

Given the points that have been made, as the legislation progresses and comes into force, it would be helpful for the committee to be kept aware of how it is actually working and whether it is achieving its aims. Does anyone want to ask the cabinet secretary anything that they have not asked already or to make a comment? Bob Doris has his hand up.

The committee is agreed, and we will report on the outcome in due course. I invite committee members to delegate authority to me, as convener, to approve the draft report for publication.

Members indicated agreement.

Our next item is consideration of a type 1 consent notification for a proposed UK statutory instrument. On 5 June, the Minister for Climate Action notified the committee of the UK SI. The instrument will involve the UK Government legislating within devolved competence and it seeks the Scottish Government’s consent for it to do so.

The Scottish Government proposes to consent to the instrument, which, as the clerk’s paper explains, would require producers of products to pay the full net cost of managing their packaging at the end of life.

The committee’s role is to decide whether it agrees with the Scottish Government’s proposal to consent to the UK Government making those regulations within devolved competence, and in the manner that has been indicated. If members are content for consent to be given, the committee will write to the Scottish Government accordingly. In so writing, we have the option to draw matters to the Government’s attention, pose questions or ask to be kept up to date on relevant developments.

If the committee is not content with the proposal, it may make one of the two recommendations that are outlined in the clerk’s note. We can recommend that the provisions should not be made at all, or that the Scottish Government take an alternative legislative approach—for example, by bringing forward its own Scottish statutory instruments.

I hope that that is all clear. To help to inform our decision, we have invited the cabinet secretary to stay and give evidence. I am not going to welcome you back again, Gillian, but you are here with us.

We are also joined by a number of Scottish Government officials. David McPhee is doing a third tour of duty in his role as deputy director for the circular economy; Alex Brown is, I think, joining us for the first time as circular economy policy officer; and Carolyn Boyd is on her third tour of duty, too. Thank you for joining us.

I now move to questions from members, with the first question coming, I believe, from Jackie Dunbar.

Sorry—I still am the convener. I will let you have one more question, then I will move on.

Cabinet secretary, you have made an announcement that, truthfully, I need a moment to consider. I do not know whether this is possible, but it would be very helpful if you could share what you read out with the committee clerks now, so that that can be circulated to committee members for them to look at when considering their other questions. Truthfully, I did not catch all that you just said and its ramifications.

I just note that I would have deep concern if we were all to go forward on different timescales, because that would mean that an illicit market was easily fuelled from elsewhere. I will leave it at that, but I will certainly come back on this whole thing if implementation does not happen all at the same time.

Cabinet secretary, I am delighted that you chose the committee to do that, and I am not criticising you for that. While I am trying to convene the meeting, I am also listening to what you and other members are saying, so it would be helpful to have that information in front of me. I can have that now, so that is perfect.

Douglas Lumsden wants to say something, too.