Meeting of the Parliament 05 February 2026 [Draft]
I respect what the convener said in that regard. As he pointed out and as I know as the former convener of two committees, a judgment is made on behalf of committee members about what additional evidence a committee might want to take. It is up to the committee to make that decision, so I will demur from giving my point of view on it.
The report discusses the bill’s potential impact on the planning system and permitted activities. I have given further thought to that and discussed it with the Minister for Public Finance, Ivan McKee, following the evidence that the committee received from local authorities, and I am well placed to lodge amendments at stage 2. However, I would be happy to work with any member who is similarly considering amendments on that, including Ms Lennon, members of the committee or members in the wider Parliament.
Other issues that the stage 1 report raised include definitions in the framing of the offence, the bill’s treatment of cumulative harm, omissions and courses of conduct. The report also makes some recommendations about the provision of guidance. Those matters were discussed during stage 1 evidence gathering and, although the committee raises concerns that they are not fully resolved, I am confident that we can reach satisfactory positions to guide consideration at stage 2. The Government is willing, as is Ms Lennon—she has stated that already—and I hope that other members will be involved in that, should they wish, and that they will engage with both of us.
I take seriously the concerns that the committee raised. I am very grateful to the committee members for their consideration of the bill. I have to say that I agree with Edward Mountain. I took a member’s bill through the Parliament in the previous session and I started it early. My advice, as well as Mr Mountain’s, is that, if members start early, such issues will not arise.