DID LORNA SLATER MISLEAD PARLIAMENT?

Lorna Slater told Holyrood last week she had applied for an exemption for the botched deposit-return scheme. But if the request was only received in London today, did she mislead parliament?

THE last time a UK Internal Market (UKIM) exemption was requested it took five months for Whitehall to process, consider and reach a decision. At that time it was in relation to single use plastics, this time the fate of the entire deposit-return scheme (DRS) hangs in the balance. Worse still, there is only five months before the DRS is supposedly starting.

This presents a big problem for the Scottish Government, which will now need to press and pray the UK Government will expediate matters.

However someone needs to ask the obvious question, why are we even at this point? According to Scottish Government Minister Lorna Slater, she had sought a UKIM exemption as far back as July 2021 for the DRS. But Secretary of State for Scotland Alistair Jack as recently as February this year is on record stating no official exemption for the DRS from the UKIM has been received. Only today is Mr Jack confirming formal receipt of such an exemption request.

Clearly someone is not telling us the truth, someone is at serious risk of fibbing to their respective parliament. It’s time we had a look at the timeline of what Ms Slater has been telling MSPs and the public

February 2023

February 9, Ms Slater wrote a letter to MSPs where she penned the following:

“The Deposit and Return Scheme for Scotland Regulations were approved by the Scottish Parliament in 2020 and are wholly within devolved competence.

The formal process for excluding the deposit return scheme regulations from the Internal Market Act is well underway. This is the same process we went through to protect Scotland’s ban on many single-use plastic products. I expect a decision from the UK Government as soon as possible given that this is what is needed to give industry absolute clarity.”

Now I draw your attention to three points. Firstly, Ms Slater directly states the DRS is viewed as completely and entirely within the competency of the devolved settlement. Secondly, the formal legal process for securing “excluding the deposit return scheme from regulations” of the UKIM act was well under way. Thirdly, she directly links the dealing with DRS to single use plastics regarding UKIM regulations.

Based on these three points it is impossible for any reasonable person to reach any other conclusion that a formal request for exemption had been made and one was indeed necessary as was the case with single-use plastics.

But this is where the first significant problem arises. On February 23 2023, Secretary of State for Scotland Alistair Jack speaks to the House of Commons, informing MPs:

“We have not been asked for an exemption for this under the rules of the UK Internal Market Act 2020 (UKIM) by the Scottish Government – no request for an exemption has come”

At this point someone had to be lying to their respective parliament. Either an formal request for a UKIM exemption was issued and received for consideration or it wasn’t. Either Mr Jack misled the mother of all parliaments or Ms Slater was fibbing to the national parliament of Scotland.

March 2023

As recently as five days ago Ms Slater was insisting Mr Jack was not telling the truth, that her version of events was correct. She stood before the chamber on March 1 and insisted the UK Government was attempting to sabotage the DRS.

She explicitly accused Mr Jack of lying to the Commons. She said in blunt terms that

“the Scottish Government has sought that exemption since July 2021”

It is impossible for Ms Slater to be any clearer. According to her account, the Scottish Government has been seeking UKIM exemption since July 2021 only to be stymied by wicked Westminster. In short, the Scottish Government Minister for Green Skills, Circular Economy and Biodiversity has doubled down. She has already formally requested the necessary exemptions. She stated this to MSPs in writing in February 9, and verbally reiterated it March 1 2023.

An essential prerequisite with being definitive is that you really need to be entirely sure of your ground. However Ms Slater’s account of events has been challenged again by Mr Jack. The UK Government has officially announced it has received the necessary formal request…today.

Friends, March 6, 2023 is clearly not July 2021. It stretches credulity that the entire British government, civil service and Whitehall are all locked in a conspiracy to “sabotage” Lorna Slater and her deposit return scheme. In fact, it seems far more likely that the DRS is akin to a runaway train hurtling toward a brick wall and the nationalist coalition in Holyrood are resorting to a familiar playbook.

I have been a watcher of our devolved politics for long enough to spot how this all goes. SNP and the Scottish Greens push a policy. It’s battered through parliament without much interest in reasonable amendment from parliamentary critics with concerns. Ministerial incompetence yields to a botched mess and those in power reach for the ‘blame Westminster’ line to evade accountability.

Depressingly it has frequently worked as a tried and true political tactic. But this time things are different, even the blind can see the blundering mess this Holyrood administration has made of implementation.

Klaxon statistics

As if the very legality of the DRS isn’t clear weren’t bad enough, Ms Slater has been resorting to questionable statistics to sell the policy.

Apparently the DRS rollout isn’t an epic disaster at all, in fact “664 drink producers representing over 90% of the total volume of drinks containers sold in Scotland each year have completed registration with Circularity Scotland for Scotland’s deposit-return scheme”.

Only one problem. I can access the internet, am able to use my fingers and type in the website address of Circularity Scotland. Their website states in clear - unambiguous - terms they were anticipating 4,500 producers registering.

So if we believe Ms Slater, as of 1st March (the deadline for registering for the DRS), only 664 actually have. What the Scottish Government minister feels disinclined to confess is that a pathetic 14.75 per cent of producers actually registered.

This rather changes things. One thing it really changes is the credibility of Ms Slater’s insistence to parliament and public that the reason the DRS is struggling to get up and running is due to Westminster sabotage. If we simply examine the evidence before our eyes the real answer is plain as day: the SNP-Green administration have serially mishandled producer registration. Less than one in seven have registered, that dear friends is the reason DRS is collapsing before it even launches. Producers have concerns, deep enough that they are - en-masse - refusing to register. It wouldn’t be the first time the Scottish Government has rejected critical voices, pressed on regardless and suddenly found themselves up the proverbial creak without a paddle. We just need to remember the GRA reform row as a case in point.

Resignation matter?

This ultimately brings us to the elephant in the room: did Ms Slater mislead Holyrood? Did she tell porky-pies to our elected representatives not once but on more than one occasion?

If Ministers fail to provide accurate and truthful information they need to resign. Should a Minister fail correct the record as swiftly as possible upon realising something was said in error of reality they must resign.

I will leave it to you all to judge for yourselves if this has escalated to a resignation matter for the Scottish Government Minister for Green Skills, Circular Economy and Biodiversity.

---

My work is entirely reader-supported. To receive new posts and support my work, please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Or alternatively why not buy me a coffee with a one-off donation?