Chamber and committees

Yes.

The enforcement of anything that we bring in is absolutely crucial.

First, there is the communication that we would have with retailers around what the ban means for them. Twenty-nine of the 32 local authorities were supportive of the proposal. Their trading standards officers already have the powers to deal with any kind of illicit goods being sold, and these regulations add to that.

However, as you will remember, beyond the enforcement powers that trading standards officers already have and the offence provisions that are in these regulations, the Circular Economy (Scotland) Act 2024 amended the regulation-making powers in the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to enable enforcement officers to issue fixed-penalty notices as an alternative to prosecution for offences. The shorter, sharper and more effective approach of fining—rather than prosecuting, using the whole court process—will be a lot more straightforward than some of the processes that we have had, and that might release a bit of capacity in the system.

The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government is the person who you have to ask about finance for local government; it is not really for me to answer that. However, as with any ban, there will be an initial concentration of activity until everyone gets used to the fact that single-use vapes are no longer available and then there will be a tailing off. Those products just will not be in the system any more and retailers will get used to that. All the mechanisms for the public to report anyone selling them will be open, as well.

The sale of anything online is subject to the same regulations as the sale of anything on the high street. If it is illegal to sell something online and it is a UK-based business that is doing so, that business is subject to the regulations that we have here, so it would be breaking the law.

In the case of online sales from outside the UK, there will be increased funding from the UK Government to the Border Force and His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs to deal with that. They are preparing for the fact that there will probably be an issue with people purchasing single-use vapes online, although not necessarily from the UK. If you purchased something such as a dangerous weapon or illegal pharmaceuticals, those would be subject to customs searches. In the same way, Border Force and HMRC are alive to the fact that people might try to bring in single-use vapes from outwith the country by purchasing them online. Therefore, more resources will be put into those mechanisms at UK level.

I want to make it clear that every one of the four nations wants the DRS to be up and running well before that.

This is not something that I had in my notes, but my officials tell me that it is funded via existing grant aid. If there is any more detail that I can get the committee, I will.

I hope that everyone understands the reasons for the change in the status of Zero Waste Scotland. It speaks to the fact that so many amendments that we have had over the past four weeks have sought more accountability. Giving Zero Waste Scotland the status of an executive NDPB will improve accountability for its data and actions.

There are no material additional costs to the running of Zero Waste Scotland. Zero Waste Scotland will just be more accountable, as I set out in my remarks. It will have a duty to have a board that has equal representation, for example, and it will have more accountability and public sector duties associated with it. However, operationally, there will not be additional costs.

Thank you for that, convener. Obviously, if there is not a material difference in the budget that is required for something, it will not be in my notes or in the presentation that I give you. The amendment is really about the material difference that it will make in the responsibilities and the accountabilities of Zero Waste Scotland. If there is not an associated cost with that, of course the cost is not something that I will have highlighted. Obviously, convener, you have every right to ask me whether there is an associated cost, and I did not have that in front of me. My officials have very kindly given me detail of that. There will not be any material cost in that change. Zero Waste Scotland receives almost 100 per cent of its funding from the Scottish Government, and operations are based around Scottish Government priorities and processes.

The committee is about to decide on the amendment. As a result of that decision, there will again be a reflection on whether it means a change to the financial memorandum ahead of stage 3, although it is not expected that it will do so.

To reply to Mr Doris, as he and the committee know, the Scottish budget takes into account what is required of public bodies, and budgets are set accordingly during the budget process.

I do not accept Mr Simpson’s criticism of the way in which I work and the interactions that I have with my officials, but I also do not accept that I am putting—

Can I continue?

Yes, thank you, convener. I listened carefully to Maurice Golden and I respect the intention behind amendment 207. I support the ambition to increase the visibility of existing and planned waste reprocessing infrastructure. I can see the benefits that it can bring for drive and investment but, at the moment, I do not consider that, as it is drafted, the requirement should be in the bill. I would value having time to consider the amendment more carefully, including evaluating costing, timing, the feasibility of developing a report, the impact on other commitments and whether commissioning an independent review would be a more appropriate strategy.

We mentioned the report that was undertaken in relation to incineration that was referred to by a couple of members, particularly Mr Golden. Within the draft circular economy and waste route map, data and infrastructure are identified as key areas of focus that will underpin the circular economy transformation that we need to deliver. That underlines the importance of identifying future strategic infrastructure requirements for Scotland as a whole and, taking a place-based approach, for local needs. That is linked to national planning framework 4.

Yes, I will.