Sarah Boyack
Scottish Labour · Scotland
“It must ensure that people get support to make their homes warm and energy efficient; support on solar, heat pumps and heat networks; affordable and accessible buses that they can rely on, with links to our railways; investment in our land to restore our peatlands; and a joined-up approach to food production and biodiversity.”
“Referring to what Ariane Burgess said, I have also been campaigning on the need to urgently address our climate and nature emergencies and to create decent jobs and empower local communities at the same time. For me, being in here is about delivering change that will benefit my constituents.”
“That taught me that constructive hard work and using the powers of our Parliament could deliver real change. For me, it was about investing in our railways—Airdrie to Bathgate, Larkhall to Milngavie and Stirling to Alloa, and supporting work on the Borders railway—as well as new CalMac ferries, improving island airports and tackling potho…”
“I hope that it is okay that I borrow a minute from my colleague. In the run-up to the 2016 election, I worked on a member’s bill to introduce a transient visitor levy.”
“In the climate change plan, we also set out greater detail on our methodology in order to provide greater transparency on the key assumptions and dependencies. However, Sarah Boyack is absolutely right, and that is where constructive criticism comes in— constructive criticism that recognises all the things in the plan that we need to do.”
“We need an urgent focus on implementation. Does the cabinet secretary agree that a key message from those who gave evidence to the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee and other parliamentary committees was that it is all about delivery and that the draft plan did not go far enough?”
The complete record
Every one of 502 lines we hold for Sarah Boyack, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 11.
“What is happening to the employees of Wave Energy Scotland? They are distressed and worried that they will be made redundant. We absolutely need to save WES. Does the cabinet secretary agree that defunding it when we possess an estimated 10 per cent of Europe’s wave potential is absolutely the wrong way to go? Gillian Martin: As I said, we have put £70 million into Wave Energy Scotland since 2014. The obligations to other companies that it has put in place as a result of the grant funding that we have given it are a matter for WES. On Sarah Boyack’s main point, which was about those who work for Wave Energy Scotland, that is why I am working with it and why we are funding it for the next year.”
“I note Ariane Burgess’s comments about the Scottish Government’s response of “We are considering these matters”. The sooner we get clarity, the better—not just for members, but for key stakeholders. I urge colleagues to support the bill. We need to engage constructively with the concerns that have been raised so that we deliver future-focused, successful legislation. The legislation has to work. I suspect that those who are members in the next session will be discussing the matter again, in relation to cruise ships, how the legislation is working or the details—and details in legislation are important. Guidance, monitoring, ensuring that we have made the bill the best that it can be, given the circumstances that we are going through—that is our job. Let us work constructively to do it. 15:57”
“One issue that frequently comes up in representations from those who have been consulted is the challenge for small businesses in working their way through the process of a visitor levy. It is critical that there is guidance and monitoring, and that lesson are learned from how the visitor levy is implemented across the country. Stakeholders have made the point that the use and booking of accommodation has all got much more complicated in the past few years, and that needs to be reflected so that the bill works as intended. One point that has been made quite a lot of times is about the importance of ensuring that the amendments to the 2024 act will work. We need to strengthen the legislation and we need to keep up with the growth that parts of our country are now experiencing.”
“The minister is willing to consider the concerns that have been raised by the Law Society of Scotland about fairness. For example, people may have to stay in a tourist area that has a levy in place because of hospital appointments or court proceedings. It is absolutely critical that we do not create unintended burdens for people who are already going through stressful situations. The bill gives local authorities powers to act, and it enables them to do so in a way that suits local businesses. I support the committee’s call for implementation to be monitored. With different approaches taken in different parts of the country, it is important that lessons are learned. I suggest that the Government could think about guidance.”
“Alasdair Allan’s point about cruise ships was well made, although, of course, there must be a balance, as we do not want to have millions of amendments between now and the end of parliamentary session. A key point that has been made repeatedly is that it is critical that local authorities have flexibility. Although a percentage tax makes sense for a city such as Edinburgh, other councils want to take a different approach. It would be good to get clarification in the minister’s closing speech as to whether the Scottish Government will publish its draft amendments as soon as possible for stage 2, and then for stage 3, which I think he is willing to do. That would enable us to properly scrutinise the amendments and ensure that stakeholders are listened to, so that we can do the parliamentary work that we are here to do.”
“The modest amount of cash that will go to support affordable homes will enable workers who support the tourism sector to live and stay in our city. As many members have said, it is about recognising that tourism, as with any major industry, requires reinvestment. Other European cities have long used visitor levies to balance the needs of residents and visitors alike. A key issue that has been highlighted by committee members is that, when the 2024 act was passed, there was a need for flexibility in different areas of Scotland that faced different challenges and opportunities in managing tourism, but that was not reflected in the legislation.”
“For us, that will be transformative. That money could be used to maintain and improve the infrastructure that visitors rely on, including our streets, public transport and parks, and our cultural venues. It could protect our historic environment and help to ensure that the benefits of tourism are felt across the city, not just in the city centre. For example, Leith theatre is lined up to receive £4 million to help it to reopen and £3 million is set to go to the old Royal high school. Our culture sector cannot wait to see money being invested in its projects, but we need to ensure that we get it right. I say to members who have not been in the Parliament since 1999 that the area has been transformed by tourism and we have a housing emergency.”
“I start by thanking the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee for its excellent work on the legislation. It feels like yesterday when the 2024 act was passed, which was vital for my city of Edinburgh. Our visitor levy scheme will start this year and is a practical and vital tool that will allow our capital to manage the pressures and opportunities that come with being one of the most popular and visited cities in Europe. Edinburgh welcomes millions of visitors every year, and the number of visitors is set only to increase. Visitors are drawn by our festivals, our heritage, our culture and our global reputation, which we are proud of. However, that success comes with real costs. The City of Edinburgh Council estimates that the visitor levy could raise around £90 million over three years when it is implemented.”
“The bill will strengthen the existing framework in a way that supports Scotland’s excellent tourism sector. It reflects the recognition from parts of industry that a clear, workable and locally responsive system can provide benefits for communities and visitors alike. The bill as introduced will bring positive changes by enhancing flexibility for local authorities with an additional basis of charge that will allow levies to be set as a fixed amount or amounts. It also clarifies the arrangements for sales of accommodation to third parties and amends returns provisions so that returns are calculated on the date of stay and not on the date of the chargeable transaction.”
“In its evidence to the committee, the Law Society of Scotland suggested that an exemption from the levy be considered for visitors who are compelled to stay in accommodation for the purposes of attending hospital for diagnosis or treatment and for those attending a court or a tribunal as a litigant, witness or accused person. Will the Government consider lodging a stage 2 amendment to deal with that? The Deputy Presiding Officer: Minister, I will give you the time back. Ivan McKee: The exemption powers that local authorities have would already enable such an exemption to be made at the local level. However, I am willing to engage in further discussions if Sarah Boyack considers that aspects of that issue are not covered effectively by the existing powers.”
“There is a substantial expansion of the population in the east of Scotland, and in particular in the east of the city of Edinburgh and into East Lothian. All those issues will be part of the detailed consideration that the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service will undertake, and I know that the issues that Sarah Boyack raises will also form part of that consideration. Police Stations (Lanarkshire) 6.”
“Is the First Minister aware of the concerns of local communities about the impact of the closure of Marionville fire station without a local replacement? Given the strong cross-party support to deliver a station that will meet the needs of our growing communities in the area, will he step in to support our call on the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service to save Marionville station? The First Minister: I am familiar with the issues around Marionville, which members have raised a number of times, and I have sought information and advice on those questions. The situation there is part of the dilemma that I talked about in my answer to Rachael Hamilton, whereby we must make careful judgments about the placement of resources. There will be changes to population spread.”
“Large heath butterflies could be under threat from climate change, and championing the species has shown me how vital peatland restoration is not just for one species, but for carbon storage, flood mitigation, biodiversity and community resilience. More than 100 MSPs have taken part in the initiative, and I welcome the fact that it will be relaunched in the next session of Parliament because it will give new MSPs the chance to advocate for our threatened species and habitats. I hope that everybody will keep on campaigning together, because it could not be more important. 17:52”
“As John Mason highlighted, in every community in urban and rural Scotland, people benefit directly from action to protect biodiversity, whether through urban green spaces, community gardens or local wildlife corridors in our urban areas. As the nature champion for the large heath butterfly, I thank Butterfly Conservation Scotland, because I have now seen at first hand just how closely that species is linked to the health of Scotland’s bogs. It is a true bog specialist, thriving on our upland blanket bogs and lowland raised bogs—habitats for which Scotland is internationally important. The large heath butterfly is an indicator species. Its caterpillars rely on cottongrass, and the adults feed on cross-leaved heath, so when the butterfly is doing well, that tells us that those habitats are in good condition.”
“During that process, I was proud to bring many amendments to the table, some of which were even agreed to. I was especially happy to support the amendment to add swift bricks to new buildings; that is just one example of how small, targeted interventions can support species that are under pressure. In fighting for nature, I have always stressed that nature is not a luxury. It is vital to our health and wellbeing, and it contributes to the quality of our food, the strength of our tourism sector and the resilience of our economy. If we are serious about tackling the climate and nature emergencies, we have to invest in our natural environment and in the communities that care for it, because a healthy natural world makes our communities more resilient.”
“I, too, thank John Mason for bringing this important debate to the chamber. Before the debate, I was inundated with colleagues telling me what species they champion. I am proud to be a nature champion, because it is an initiative that genuinely brings nature to life for us all. It makes us more aware of what is happening in our constituencies; which species are under pressure; which habitats need support; and where communities are stepping up to support local wildlife. I thank Scottish Environment LINK and its members for consistently campaigning for nature and for educating us all on the issues that really matter. Just two weeks ago, Parliament passed the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill, which marks a significant step forward in strengthening protections for Scotland’s biodiversity.”
“More guidance for regulators on the definition of ecocide, such as ecological criteria, scientific indicators and practical examples, is important, because we need to ensure that those who exercise power and control in organisations are held to account. Issues such as contractor- subcontractor relationships also need to be flagged at the next stage. I agree with what was said in the discussions that the committee had about the bill’s application to properly consented activities. Again, the concerns from key sectors will be addressed not only through amendments to the bill but through guidance from Government. Although the committee members did not all agree that the bill should progress to stage 2, I do not think that we should kick it into touch. It will need work, but that is not an argument for our voting it down today. 14:52”
“That would mean more joined-up work and adequate resources for the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, Environmental Standards Scotland, NatureScot, the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service and the police. I agree with committee colleagues that the bill needs to be amended, but the fact that work has already been done between both the member in charge of the bill and the cabinet secretary is important. Useful points were made about joined- up thinking during committee meetings. For example, it was suggested that there could be an alternative conviction provision to avoid a gap between existing legislation and new ecocide legislation. Therefore, it is important that we are already having constructive discussions.”
“However, Professor Campbell Gemmell said that we should not assume that the lack of a section 40 prosecution does not mean a lack of environmental harm being caused, and he made the observation that the number of public complaints has doubled while the number of prosecutions has significantly declined. That needs to be considered. Edward Mountain: Will the member take an intervention? Sarah Boyack: I apologise, but I have only four minutes. That is important, because the potential impact of deterrence would have to be backed up by guidance and training for those involved in reporting instances and those involved in prosecutions.”
“The cabinet secretary made an important point at committee when she said that she hoped that the bill would never have to be used, because it would mean that such a severe event had occurred. However, the fact that we would not want to use legislation does not mean that we should not have it in place, because the deterrent effect is important. Therefore, the comments made by witnesses to the committee that we need an “apex” to our environmental crime legislation are also right. The key issue, which has already been mentioned, is that there is a striking lack of prosecutions and convictions under section 40 of the 2014 act.”
“Monica Lennon has made the key argument that the European Union environmental crime directive will see EU states strengthening their legislation and increasing their penalties, and it is vital that we do not fall behind other countries but send a clear message that ecocide is not acceptable. There were several key issues on which the committee took evidence that suggested that we need a joined-up approach to section 40 of the Regulatory Reform (Scotland) Act 2014 if the bill is to be passed. There was clear support for increased penalties, and the fact that the cabinet secretary has been working with the member on key areas where the bill needs to be amended is important.”
“I, too, thank Monica Lennon for her work on the bill and for introducing it in Parliament. I know just how much work is required to introduce a bill in our Parliament. I also thank the expert witnesses who gave evidence to the committee, the stakeholders and all our parliamentary staff. As members who have read the committee’s stage 1 report will know, there are key issues that need to be considered in relation to the drafting of the bill and its potential impact. The bill would create a new crime and there would be consequences for intentional or reckless severe environmental destruction, with the court being able to impose an unlimited fine, a prison term of up to 20 years, a compensation order or a publicity order.”
“We are pushing ahead with electrification, which is one way in which we can work towards net zero and encourage people to choose trains, as the member suggested.”
“Does the cabinet secretary accept that commuting by train is critical if we are to give people the choice not to use their cars? Will she focus on the issue of timescales, which affects not only trains from Fife to Edinburgh but those from the Borders to Edinburgh? Those key commuting links need extra capacity, and we must ensure that that is delivered as soon as possible. Fiona Hyslop: I have just referred to the announcement of the £342 million investment. We are also electrifying the Borders railway line, which will provide new trains. Through our integration of track and train, the planning for that allows us to get best value for the public purse, and that approach will absolutely improve things for the Borders and Fife. There is an ambitious programme for the railways in Scotland.”
“More widely, we will be able to put together a marine restoration fund and do strategic work to deal with all the pressures impacting on seabird populations, and we will be able to use some of the money that has come from the development of Berwick Bank to fund the project more widely.”
“Given that Berwick Bank has now been approved, what is the Scottish Government doing to work with the developer and local communities to reduce the project’s impact on seabirds, to deliver local manufacturing and job opportunities, and to enable links to community heat networks? I am happy to get a written update, but those are practical things that the cabinet secretary needs to be leading on. Gillian Martin: Sarah Boyack mentioned a lot of things in her question and, as she has suggested, I will write to her with more detail on them. On the issue of the impact on seabirds, in particular, I believe that the developer is engaging with the environmental non-governmental organisations on that.”
“It has impacts for all of us, for our health and wellbeing and for future generations, so we need sustained political support from members across the chamber. Scottish Labour will support efforts to strengthen our natural environment and will keep pushing for the action, ambition and accountability that Scotland’s biodiversity crisis demands. That is why we will support the bill. 17:22”
“It is vital that the Parliament examines that issue in the next session, because we cannot just rely on the UK marine strategy. We have devolved powers that can and should be used to set out how we will meet nature restoration targets in our own waters. I mentioned that I was grateful to the cabinet secretary for engaging constructively on those points, but work needs to continue. The sector is ready to contribute to the solutions that we need. I know that some work is under way, and I welcome that assurance, but delivery, transparency and accountability will determine whether the bill succeeds. The values that underpin the bill—collaboration, ambition and a willingness to listen—must continue long after today’s vote, because nature recovery is not a short-term, tick-the-box process but a long-term exercise.”
“Throughout the process, the passion, expertise and urgency expressed by those who work in our marine and fishing environment stood out to me. We need to do more to ensure that our seas are restored and resilient. I will focus on that. We heard repeatedly that the Scottish Government will continue to work through all the options. I would like more clarity on what that will mean in practice. We heard concerns that the UK marine strategy requires Scotland only to contribute to UK-wide reporting on progress towards good environmental status in regional sea areas. It does not require the Scottish Government to show that progress for Scotland or to give the Scottish Parliament scrutiny powers for Scotland- specific progress.”
“We will continue to work with all the stakeholders, environmental organisations, business organisations and community groups to ensure that the issues that they raised do not fall away simply because the bill has been passed. Many of the decisions involved debates about how different pieces of legislation would impact different communities. Monitoring and reporting on the bill will be critical. Delivery will matter. I thank the committee for its consideration, and I thank the clerks. Honestly, a huge amount of work was involved. The pre-stage 1 work, moving all the way through stage 2 and having a good level of engagement at stage 3 have all been critical. It has also been vital to hear directly from people who work in our landscapes and on our rivers, our lochs and our seas. I will reflect briefly on the marine sector in particular.”
“I cannot list all the organisations concerned in the way that I normally would, as there are so many, but the engagement process to strengthen transparency, improve reporting and ensure that commitments are backed by clear mechanisms for delivery has been important. I welcome the fact that some of our proposals were accepted and received cross-party support— indeed, colleagues even assisted us in drafting them. That shows that constructive engagement can lead to better lawmaking. Not all our amendments were successful, and we are disappointed about that. However, as I said, we have put lots of issues on the record, and I hope that in the next session new ministers will provide the leadership and action that will be urgently needed right across those issues. Our commitment will not stop today.”
“Scottish Labour has been consistent in its core aim of improving the legislation where possible and making it more ambitious, more accountable and more capable of delivering the nature recovery that Scotland urgently needs. We have lodged a series of amendments to part of the bill—not to obstruct it, but to enhance and strengthen it, and sometimes to get issues on the official record. Those reflect proposals and detailed evidence from: Scottish Environment LINK, which has done superb work in pulling stakeholders together; the Marine Conservation Society; the Sustainable Inshore Fisheries Trust; and the Scottish Creel Fishermen’s Federation. A huge amount of work has been done by them and other organisations, such as the Woodlands Trust and RSPB Scotland.”
“From Labour’s perspective, as regards the many amendments that were debated at stage 2, after the detailed scrutiny of our committee colleagues—and even at stage 3, when there were still huge numbers of amendments—the volume and quality of contributions from stakeholders, experts and communities have been remarkable. That engagement has shaped our approach throughout. I hope that, collectively, our efforts have strengthened the legislation and underlined how vital it is. The future of our biodiversity is uncertain in the age of the twin climate and nature emergencies, so having strong legislation and clear guidance will be critical if we are to secure a more sustainable future.”
“I apologise to the cabinet secretary and colleagues for not being in the chamber at the start of the debate. I missed the entire opening speech because I was chairing a Commonwealth Parliamentary Association branch executive meeting. I will look it up in the Official Report after this meeting. As we reach the end of stage 3 of the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill, it is clear that we have all been through an amazing process. The bill has generated an enormous level of engagement. I acknowledge the work of the committee, our clerks and our staff. The amount of support that we have received in the Parliament has been huge. We do not normally have late-night sittings. The effort made to get us to this point has been huge.”
“Given the immediate and severe impact of the ending of the investing in communities fund, could the First Minister tell members when community organisations will be informed about the transitional funding or bridging arrangements that will be provided to prevent the collapse of vital local services? I have been made aware that Dr Bell’s community centre in Leith, which supports more than 600 families every year, will have to close its doors because of the abrupt withdrawal of that vital funding, which will leave families without the essential support that the community centre provides. Will the First Minister make a commitment to listen to those organisations across Scotland that are facing collapse, to give clarity and to act now?”
“As I draw the debate to a close, I thank Edward Mountain and Sarah Boyack for their contributions. With regard to the SAF working group, Edward Mountain was absolutely correct: it was wound down while project willow was on-going, and there is still work to come out of it. Scottish Enterprise is finalising a report that will look at the economic benefits of producing SAF in Scotland. Sarah Boyack talked about wind potential. In my view, the point is this. Would it not be absolutely fantastic if we had full control to manage all of this—all the resources, all the abilities and all the things that are sitting here in Scotland—through independence? The Presiding Officer: That concludes the debate on the motion on legislative consent for the Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill, which is UK legislation. Point of Order 17:50”
“Other countries across the world are investing in the technology to be able to produce SAF, so we need to produce it, too. This an opportunity to lower our carbon emissions, which, as we regularly discuss, are deeply damaging, create high-quality jobs, deliver energy security for our aviation sector and allow Scotland to lead the way in delivering innovative SAF production. Agreeing to the LCM is important, but I hope that the Government uses this opportunity to keep working with the UK Government, bring potential investors together and update Parliament. The issue is not going away, and it would be useful to keep it on the Parliament’s agenda. It is a huge opportunity that we cannot afford to miss out on. The Presiding Officer: I call the minister to wind up. 17:49 Jim Fairlie: Thank you, Presiding Officer—I will not take long at all.”
“Last year’s commitment by the UK Labour Government to invest £200 million was vital in supporting progress at Grangemouth to deliver innovative low-carbon outputs and jobs. As the committee discussed, it is vital that we develop innovative production methods for the use of biogenic CO2 and green hydrogen, for example—it is critical that we use our low-carbon electricity in Scotland to deliver green hydrogen—and for the use of Scotland’s timber and wood waste as a sustainable feedstock for second-generation bioethanol, which can then be used for fuel blending for SAF. Unite said that we could deliver those ambitions by the early 2030s, but it is absolutely clear that we need to give investors the confidence to invest now.”
“If we do not produce sustainable aviation fuel in the UK, we will have to import it. That would be a massive missed opportunity in terms of jobs and our economy, but having to import low-carbon sustainable aviation fuel would also be an energy security issue for our aviation sector. I believe that we need not only to agree to the LCM today— agreeing to it is important for giving confidence and clarity to the sector—but to support the opportunity to produce SAF in Scotland. As the convener of the committee said, the recommendations included in project willow could enable investment, which would mean having highly skilled high-quality jobs in Grangemouth, lowering our carbon emissions and enabling a supply of SAF in Scotland that could be transported to our key airports.”
“This is an important debate. SAF is important because one of our key climate emissions in Scotland is air travel. It makes up 4.5 per cent of our total emissions, with transport at 16 per cent. How we power our planes is absolutely vital going forward. Although short-journey flights could be powered by electricity, SAF is an absolutely key part of our long-term solution, so the requirement to have increasing amounts of SAF to fuel our planes is vital. I thank the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, its clerks and the witnesses who gave important evidence to the committee. The fact that the committee is happy for legislative consent to be given to the relevant provisions in the bill is significant. I watched the committee’s evidence sessions, and it interrogated the issues that were raised by witnesses very effectively.”
“They will make improvement of protected sites a clear statutory priority, increase transparency and accountability, align the bill with Scotland’s European Union-derived and international nature commitments, and strengthen protection for MPAs across environmental legislation. I say to the cabinet secretary and her colleagues that the engagement of stakeholders has been incredibly strong, even between stage 2 and today’s debate. I hope that the Scottish Government will reflect and act on this matter constructively, and that is why I ask my colleagues for their support on these amendments. This issue needs to be centre stage.”
“It has been argued that targets relating to protected sites could be set under the existing target topics of habitat condition or extent, but there is no requirement that protected areas will be prioritised, and no timescale is provided for setting such a target. That is why I lodged amendment 65. My other amendments in the group would ensure that there are no delays in those targets being met. Scotland has committed to halting nature loss by 2030. Without a deadline, there is no guarantee that targets will be introduced in time to influence early delivery of that commitment. Without explicit timelines in legislation, we need to know what the Scottish Government will do to ensure timely implementation of the bill. I argue that those are not huge asks of my colleagues.”
“Like colleagues, I reflect that we will be here for some time. I have lodged my amendments 65, 67, 68 and 69, in this group, to ensure that the Scottish Government will follow through on the original aims of the bill and meet the targets that have been set out. I thank Scottish Environment LINK and the Marine Conservation Society for their continued support in crafting and engaging on those amendments. Many of Scotland’s protected sites, particularly marine protected areas, remain in unfavourable condition. Without an explicit target in relation to them, there is a risk that their restoration will be overshadowed by broader or more achievable biodiversity gains elsewhere. I want to enable the Parliament to come back and focus on that issue again.”
“I also wanted clarity to be provided on the definitions of wellbeing and sustainable development, which are mentioned in a number of pieces of legislation.”
“However, I remembered the Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009 and the fact that I was able to persuade the then Deputy First Minister to include the proposal in my draft member’s bill that all new housing developments would have to include some form of renewables. That was successful. I also thought that I would be able to feed in the incredibly valuable insights on issues that people had raised with me, such as procurement, which was not covered in my draft bill, and how to achieve a joined-up approach that would link wellbeing and sustainable development directly to the national performance framework, on which the Government could be held to account to ensure that it was effectively implemented.”
“I held several round-table sessions with key stakeholders to ensure that I understood their views. In response to my consultation, there was overwhelmingly positive support for a public duty, a clear definition and the establishment of a commissioner who could provide advice and guidance and who, critically, would have investigatory powers, the need for which is referenced in the committee’s report. When the Scottish Government announced its intention to lodge a bill of its own and initiated its consultation, I was disappointed, because I thought that if the Scottish Government progressed its bill, my bill would have to fall.”
“This has been a long journey. I thank the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, the clerks and all the stakeholders who contributed to the consultation that the committee conducted in advance of today’s debate. I also thank those who have worked with me over the past few years to enable me to get to this point, and the fantastic non- Government bills unit team, without whose support I would not be here today. I started work on my bill in 2021. Support for legislation on wellbeing and sustainable development, with clear definitions, a public duty and a commissioner who could deliver accountability, guidance and advice and hold the Government and public sector bodies to account was included not only in the Scottish Labour manifesto; other parties signed up to a wellbeing and sustainable development bill, too.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it will introduce standards and regular public reporting on hospital discharges and the use of non-clinical spaces to deliver care. (S6O-05396)”
“Through 47 projects, we have supported 27 councils to reduce waste and increase recycling rates. Of course, the United Kingdom-wide extended producer responsibility for packaging scheme has also come into force. Those reforms are anticipated to increase recycling rates for packaging materials to at least 76 per cent by 2030. That scheme will augment the funding that the Scottish Government has provided. Transport Links (Severe Weather) 3.”
“What extra resources is the Scottish Government allocating to local councils to enable them to invest in new infrastructure so that they can separate household waste and maximise recycling, given their key role as waste producers, waste collectors and waste managers, and given the duty that they will have to take all reasonable steps to separate collections for metals, glass, plastics, paper and card? Will food be included? Gillian Martin: As well as providing record funding of more than £15.1 billion to local authorities in 2025-26 through the block grant, in 2021, the Scottish Government launched the £70 million recycling improvement fund, which provides capital funding grants to help local authorities to improve infrastructure and related services.”