Meeting of the Parliament 15 December 2016
Given my performance during First Minister’s question time earlier, I should perhaps start by declaring an interest, in that I am guilty of creating food waste in my time. I take Mark Ruskell’s pre-emptive rebuke in the spirit in which it was intended.
I, too, welcome the debate. I support Roseanna Cunningham’s motion and, indeed, much, if not all, of what she had to say in her remarks. Equally, I support Peter Chapman’s amendment that lays particular emphasis on the circular economy, which is helpful. Much as I would like to support Claudia Beamish’s amendment, given her track record in this and related areas, and much as I believe that the Scottish Government needs to be aspirational and ambitious in that area, for all the reasons that other members have suggested, I think that we also need to be realistic. In the brief time available to me, I will set out one of the reasons why I do not think that what is suggested in that amendment is achievable.
In Orkney, there is a real appetite to recycle and to improve our environmental performance. Indeed, there is often frustration when people find that they cannot do more. On an island, using resources sustainably and recycling are self-evidently the right things to do, but Orkney, as the cabinet secretary alluded to in her remarks, is currently exempt from the food waste regulations on the basis of rurality. There is no plant. In the main, solid waste is sent north, to Shetland, to the heat and power generation scheme up there. The costs involved in collection in Orkney are prohibitively high at this stage. Nobody is happy with that state of affairs and good work is going on locally to try to find a solution.
The local council is working with SSE, Scottish Water and some of the waste producers in the agriculture, aquaculture, food and drink and shipping sectors to come up with an innovative solution that not only deals with food waste but provides heat and power to benefit local housing and public buildings in the area, as well as commercial premises.
As one might imagine, and as the Cabinet Secretary for the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform will not be surprised to hear on the back of the budget statement that we have just heard, that comes at a cost. Officials in Orkney Islands Council have estimated the up-front capital costs at around £40 million to £45 million, which would provide a return in a £1 million to £1.5 million reduction in running costs per year. Orkney Islands Council alone cannot shoulder that cost and, understandably, is looking for match funding from the Scottish Government in due course.
However, the project will also take time to deliver. The official with whom I have been in contact suggested:
“If we started today we are still 4-5 years away from a ‘key in the door’!”
Therefore, to return to my earlier point about the Labour amendment, in a practical sense, it is simply not possible to deliver what Claudia Beamish talks about.
The Government is right to be ambitious—the reasons for that have been well articulated by other speakers—but it must will the means as well as the end. I assure Roseanna Cunningham that Orkney stands ready to play its part in creating a good food nation and driving down food waste, but I hope that she will commit to the capital and revenue support that will allow it to do so.
16:26