Chamber and committees

Have you anything to add, Mr Duncan?

Absolutely.

Such organisations are going to have to be funded somehow. They will have in their model a return in terms of sales. For example, the Edinburgh Remakery has a sales revenue stream from repairing and reselling laptop computers.

Local authorities and the third sector are going to be absolutely crucial to delivery, if central Government is not going to do it itself. We need to be very clear about how that is to develop and what it will look like, so that we get buy-in from people, and so that they know where to go and want to go there. I think that people want to do the right thing. If they know about a facility, they will go and use it, but we need to create the facilities and we need to raise awareness of where they are and what they do.

Will it be introduced at a later juncture, after the act is implemented?

Thank you, both.

Mr Fraser has rightly raised concerns regarding rural Scotland. In urban Scotland, the biggest fly-tipping that we tend to see is that of old mattresses and sofas. Mr Lumsden pointed out that the charge for collection can sometimes be prohibitive.

Discussions on extended producer responsibility are taking place across the UK and, together, we will keep a close eye on how that develops. If that does not result in an obligation being placed on providers of mattresses, sofas and other commonly fly-tipped items, would the Scottish Government consider using devolved powers to oblige those companies to make sure that there is safe, effective and appropriate disposal of those items?

To go back to my first question on the bill, considering the cost of collection and the challenge for low-income households in particular, will the third sector or local authorities be empowered and financed to help households to dispose appropriately of items that are commonly fly-tipped?

Sorry, Mr Ruskell. My question builds on Mr Ruskell’s constructive points. If section 8 of the bill were to be passed, that would give the Scottish Government powers to make regulations. However, if we see businesses changing their approach and see behavioural change towards the more circular economy that we all want to realise, those regulations may never have to be utilised.

As you said, minister, we have already seen the changes that Amazon, one of the biggest distributors in the country, is undertaking. The goods that it is sending for re-use are being utilised in parts of my constituency. Without discounting the point that my colleagues have made, this is about getting to a position in which no business lets goods go to waste. Ideally, we would not need to use the law to do that, because it should not be happening anyway.

I am sorry to interrupt, minister—I got the feeling that you were coming to the end of your articulation of those important points. If there is no obligation on the construction industry in the primary legislation in the same way that there is on individuals, I would be concerned about an imbalance. As the bill progresses, I would be grateful if you and your officials would commit to considering the evidence that we have heard on the construction industry and what potential there might be for putting more significant obligations on to that industry, given that it produces so much waste in Scotland.

I agree with my colleague’s points; we have heard strong evidence that there needs to be a much more robust process for licensing waste handlers. If we are going to put obligations on people to be more cognisant in checking how their waste is disposed of and ask them to use a licensed waste handler, we need to improve that process significantly.

With regard to the creation of a civil penalty, does the minister agree that we still need to do much more, across local authorities and the population as a whole, to inform people about recycling processes in order to help them to do the right thing?

I think that a lot of the contamination and fly-tipping is inadvertent. It happens because people are not aware of the rules, as they live busy lives and have other things to think about, so I am slightly concerned about the measure. When we create new civil penalties or criminal offences, we need to think carefully about enforcement, proportionality and ensuring that the processes are in place to help people to do the right thing. We have got more work to do in that regard.

I appreciate that. However, I am conscious that the approach will require a significant increase in the number of accessible facilities that people can walk to or get the bus to, and do not need to drive to. What are our timelines in that regard? What is the vision? What will the approach look like in urban areas and rural areas? I appreciate that that will be set out in the strategy, but it would be good, at this juncture, to get a sense of where we are moving to. I think that your official is keen to come in on that point—at your discretion, of course.