Chamber and committees

I have been listening carefully to Ben Macpherson. On paper, I was pleased with amendment 128—Mr Macpherson has put a lot of thought into it. Indeed, he referenced our report in his comments, and I was just looking back at the paragraphs that he mentioned, including paragraph 421.

Let me just read out some of that paragraph. Some councils told us that they were recycling

“a significant amount of materials ... that could have been repaired and reused”,

citing “a lack of infrastructure” as “the primary reason”. Again, our report contains really good evidence on this issue, with funding as the elephant in the room throughout the whole process. Indeed, we know that there have been concerns about the financial memorandum. I appreciate that Ben Macpherson has said today that amendment 128 is a probing amendment, but we really need a serious discussion about this issue, and it would be good to hear what the minister has to say.

The reference to the Verity house agreement was important. From my discussions with COSLA and local government, I know that they have appreciated, up to this point, their dialogue with Ms Slater and officials. I hope that that dialogue will continue because, in my view, local authorities want to do the right thing. They are ambitious for the circular economy, but the funding and the lack of capacity are putting real constraints on local authorities and other partners.

It was really good that Douglas Lumsden mentioned men’s sheds, as there has been a lot of media coverage about the funding challenges that the national organisation faces and what the situation might mean for men’s sheds in our regions and constituencies. It would be a real shame if some of them had to close.

I support amendment 128, and I thank Ben Macpherson for bringing it forward for discussion.

Will Mark Ruskell give way?

I apologise for the preamble. The question is, of course, will the minister meet me to talk about the amendments, so that we can make progress on the topic together?

On amendment 72, I want to clarify that I was not meaning to be critical of local government. The proposal could be seen as something that could enhance existing communication. Is there scope in the work on the circular economy strategy to work in partnership with our local authority colleagues and others on communication?

We would all agree that public buy-in is crucial, and the way to achieve that is to invest in public information, resources and capacity. Local authorities are doing really good work, but they all have different structures. When we went to North Ayrshire, we saw that the council there had waste awareness officers, who perform an important role. Not every council has that, but could such initiatives go into the strategy as a piece of work to take forward?

I apologise.

I think that what you are trying to do with amendment 196 is a good intention, but I wonder what it would mean in practice. Do you have any idea of how many companies or organisations would have to file such a report? Who would then assess that? Do you think that the Government has the capacity to look at that in a proper and meaningful way?

The figures vary and it will depend on what brand of nappies people are using.

I am getting carried away.

I appreciate the letter that the committee received recently from Ms Slater, which recognised the EU’s work on preventing ecocide, and her helpful comments on my proposed ecocide prevention member’s bill. The minister mentioned the human rights bill. Will she clarify when that will be introduced and whether that will include the right to a healthy environment?

Today has been a good opportunity to discuss the issue, given the way that the bill is set out. Perhaps it will not be today, given the time, but I hope that we will have time to have a conversation about the more substantial amendments. I take the point that the minister made about targets and that there could be a place for those in regulations. That is important.

I ask the minister and colleagues to think about the fact that we have had that example in North Ayrshire for five years. That good practice has existed, but something is missing in terms of others proactively learning from it. In other hearings of the committee, when we have had council leaders in front of us, I have put that example to them and they have all said that it is very laudable and good, but nothing has happened.

There is a danger that we will continue to fall behind other parts of the UK, where there is quite a lively programme of work around reusable nappy week, which happens in April every year. Other local authorities elsewhere are doing some good work.

I do not have the data here today, and I do not want to name and shame individual councils—it is not about that—but every year I have put in freedom of information requests to find out what schemes are available, and we have seen a reduction, so I would welcome—