 The next item of business is a statement by Lorna Slater on update on Scotland's deposit return scheme. The minister will take questions at the end of her statement and so there should be no interventions or interruptions. I call on Lorna Slater up to 10 minutes, minister. Presiding Officer, I welcome the opportunity to update the chamber on Scotland's deposit return scheme. There was a time, not that long ago, when I could have said that every party in this chamber backed a deposit return scheme. There was a time when we were all united in our determination to tackle the litter that blights our streets, our parks, our beaches. DRS will increase recycling rates from 50 per cent to 90 per cent and cut litter by a third. There was a time when this was the clinching argument. In 2020, this Parliament with cross-party support backed Scotland's deposit return scheme. I wish I were able to say that the scheme that we will launch in August— Excuse me, minister. At the beginning of this item, I said that there should be no interventions or interruptions. There will be an opportunity to put questions to the minister at the end of her statement. Until that point, I would be grateful if we could conduct our business in a courteous manner, minister. I wish I were able to say that the scheme that we will launch in August is innovative, groundbreaking and world-leading, but the truth is that Scotland is following the example of other countries such as Germany and Denmark, as well as regional schemes such as the ones that are seen in Canada. This means that we can look abroad and see that this concept works. The lack of uniqueness is the reassurance that it works. The fact that we are not first tells us that we are not taking unnecessary risks. I am delighted to be able to tell you that, as of this morning, 664 drinks producers, representing over 90 per cent of the total volume of drinks containers sold in Scotland each year, have completed registration with Circularity Scotland for Scotland's deposit return scheme. The Scottish Parliament set industry a challenge to take responsibility for the waste they produce to do their part in tackling the climate emergency, and I am delighted that so many have risen to that challenge already. I understand that there are still concerns among producers and particularly the smallest companies affected by the scheme. We understand those concerns. I have consistently said that SIPA will take a flexible approach where possible. It is important that those producers not yet registers know that SIPA will be pragmatic in their approach. That means that producers can continue to register even now after yesterday's deadline. Today sees us move to the next stage of registration with Circularity Scotland's announcement of the launch of registration for return point operators, the corner shops, supermarkets and other outlets where customers can return empty containers and reclaim their deposit. As Parliament knows, in response to industry feedback, we previously updated guidance and support to make it clearer, easier and quicker for retailers wishing to apply for an exemption to operating a return point. I know there remain concerns about the scheme, particularly from smaller businesses. We have been systematically working to resolve those real concerns. For example, in a package of help worth £22 million, Circularity Scotland has removed the day 1 and month 1 charges for all producers up to a threshold of £3 million per year. Above the £3 million threshold, though day 1 payments for producers using UK-wide barcodes has previously been reduced by two thirds. Circularity Scotland is providing two-month credit terms on deposits and fees up to the same volume threshold to reduce the working capital impact on all producers. I can pledge today that we will continue to listen, which is why I can confirm that my officials will work at pace to explore any further feasible, fair and legal options available to support all producers to comply with the scheme, including the potential to have a grace period if needed. Introducing any form of grace period raises questions that must be fully explored about how it would work operationally, fairly and legally for businesses and communities. There are questions about definitions, registration and enforcement, which must all be worked through. While that consideration is being done, it is still essential that all producers register for the scheme if they have not already done so. Presiding Officer, let me now turn to the question of the IMA exclusion. For weeks now, we have been addressing legitimate concerns raised with us by producers and retailers. Many good faith critiques, suggestions and proposals have been made, including by some parties here in this chamber, but others have not acted in good faith. Some have sought to exploit the real concerns among producers. Some have sought, and unfortunately with some success, to turn this into a political wedge issue, and they have done it using misinformation and deception. With that in mind, let me turn to the claim that the Scottish Government has not sought an exemption from the Internal Market Act. Let me quote what Alistair Jack, the Secretary of State for Scotland, told the House of Commons on 22 February just one week ago today. We have not been asked for an exemption for this under the rules of the UK Internal Market Act 2022 by the Scottish Government. No request for an exemption has come. This is not true. The Scottish Government has sought that exemption since July 2021. It was discussed in the November 2022 interministerial group in official-level meetings and at a ministerial meeting on January 2023. Despite that, so serious was the continued failure of the UK Government to come to a decision on the IMA exemption, the issue was escalated to the Deputy First Minister, John Swinney, in January. He wrote to the UK Government in the clearest terms. He said, I am seeking your assurance now that UK ministers will expedite a rapid solution, including an exclusion to the IMA, if that is required. I have to be straight with the chamber for the Secretary of Scotland to now claim that no such request has been made is not true. Indeed, the reply to John Swinney from the Treasury is explicit in saying that the UK Government is working on this very question. So Alistair Jack has a simple question to answer. If we never asked for an exclusion, why did the UK Treasury say that work was already underway? His claims are simply not true. His story is shifting and changing with every telling. First, we hadn't asked, then we hadn't formally asked, and then it wasn't a ministerial request. It's all nonsense. Presiding Officer, this scheme will go live in August and I can say that with confidence because people have voted with their feet. Producers have registered and I am both grateful to them for doing so and proud that Scottish businesses are rising to the challenge. They saw their legitimate concerns addressed by the Scottish Government and they decided whether to take part in the scheme. They have done so because their overwhelming majority recognise their responsibility. They don't want litter on our streets, parks and beaches either, and they recognise that DRS is the way to end that blight. But their decision poses a challenge for those in this chamber who have joined the Alistair Jacks of this world in their misinformation. I hear you say that you are pro-business. Well, business is on board. I hear you say that you are worried about jobs. Well, this scheme will create over 500 jobs. I hear you say that you are concerned about investment. DRS will see £300 million invested by the private sector in ending the blight of litter on our streets. If you want to prove that you are in favour of business, investment and jobs, get behind the scheme now, because the choice is stark. On one hand, we have this Scottish Parliament using its devolved powers to tackle the scourge of litter on our streets, and on the other we have Alistair Jack attempting to sabotage the scheme as part of his effort to undermine devolution and Scottish democracy. It's time to choose where you stand. I can tell you where this Government stands. The question for the other parties is where do they stand now, Presiding Officer. I invite the chamber to welcome the work by Circularity Scotland and producers who have given an overwhelming vote of confidence to the scheme and to recognise the work that we have undertaken in relation to the Internal Market Act. The confirmation that CEPA will continue to work pragmatically with Circularity Scotland and producers beyond 1 March to support businesses with compliance before the go live date, and the commitment to look at further options available to support all producers to comply with the scheme, including the potential to have a grace period if needed. The minister will now take questions on the issues raised in her statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for questions after which we will move on to the next item. I'd be grateful for all members who wish to ask a question where to press their request to speak buttons now, and I call Maurice Golden. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I wonder if you would accept a motion without notice under rule 8.14.3 of standing orders to allow this item of business to extend the period for questions to allow for all of those wishing to question the minister on the statement to take part. I thank Mr Golden for that. Parliament agreed to include this statement yesterday. I'm not minded to accept a motion without notice, but I will do my very best to ensure that we take as many members as possible. I thank the minister for her advance site of her statement. The scheme has been falling apart for months. Even the finance secretary says that it will cause economic carnage. Now the Scottish Government is trying to pick fight with the UK Government, which has confirmed to me in the past hour no official request for an internal market exemption has been received. That is a desperate attempt to shift blame for a home-made shambles. Small producers are appalled by the scheme roll-out and have not registered, which is why the Scottish Government has been forced to consider introducing a grace period. It's too late now to make such fundamental changes to the scheme without creating even more complexity, confusion and costs. Now registration is to remain open so much for the deadline that effectively forced some producers to sign up feeling a gun was at their head because they would be unable to trade otherwise. The bottom line is producer registration has been a disaster. The minister is desperately spinning the sign-up numbers, but the reality is that it works out to barely 16 per cent of total number of producers, 664 out of 4,000 operating in Scotland. No wonder that legal advice taken by a number of companies was not to. Why sign a blank cheque to CSL at this point? Simple question. Does the minister accept that more than 80 per cent of producers have not signed up to the scheme? As of today, producers responsible for more than 2 billion drinks containers have signed up with Circularity Scotland. That represents the full range of drinks producers from global brands to small craft breweries and distilleries. That means that more than 90 per cent of the annual total volume of products are included in the scheme—90 per cent of what we see on our shelves. That means that the scheme has momentum toward that August 16 launch. As I have said already, I am very happy to say again for producers that have not yet registered that SIPA will continue to work pragmatically with Circularity Scotland and those producers beyond today's date to bring them into compliance, because I want all those businesses to be able to continue to supply their very excellent products into the Scottish market. We want to see a viable deposit return scheme, but the statement today still leaves more questions than answer. The minister says that producers representing over 90 per cent of volume have signed up, but big producers were always going to sign up. Can she confirm that less than 20 per cent of the total number of producers in Scotland have registered? For the many thousands who haven't, because they simply do not know what they are signing up for, up until what point will they be able to register to still sell in Scotland? On the minister having voted down Labour's call last week for a delay for small producers, she now says that her officials are working at pace to come up with a delay. When will she be able to tell those producers if and when that delay will happen? Finally, the minister said that the Deputy First Minister escalated the call for an opt-out from the internal market bill in January. It was four years ago when the Government first set a date for the scheme, so I highly think that that escalated and it certainly does not show any urgency. However, what if that opt-out is not granted by August? What is the plan B, minister? There were several points in there, and I will try to address them all. On the small businesses, those who have not yet registered with Circularity Scotland and with SIPA, as I have already said, SIPA will continue to be pragmatic and support those businesses to join the scheme. I know that every business is different and every business has different concerns and needs those addressed specifically to match their business. I encourage every producer who has not yet registered with the scheme to contact Circularity Scotland and SIPA to get the correct advice for their business so that they can sign up to the scheme and register and continue to provide their products into the Scottish market from 16 August this year. The member asks about the IMA. I will repeat what I have said already. We have sought an exemption since July 2021. This is not new news. It was discussed in November at the inter-ministerial group at official level meetings and at a ministerial meeting in January 2023. This is very serious. It was continued failure of the UK Government to address this, that, as I said before, it was escalated to the Deputy First Minister to make sure that we have the decision in time. I share the member's frustration. This is a lack of clarity that businesses in Scotland really need. However, I must emphasise that, even without this lack of clarity, businesses have sufficient confidence in the scheme that they have signed on the dotted line 90 per cent of the volume, which means that we have the momentum that we need towards that August 16 launch, and that is what we can continue to work towards. Last week in this chamber, I called for the minister to be prepared with the support of this Parliament to have the space to be pragmatic and flexible. I appreciate the contents of the announcements today. Can the minister comment on the significant investment that many businesses have made to date fully in the expectation of a go live date in August? Can the minister confirm that she informed the next zero committee of this Parliament some weeks ago that there has in fact been long-existing engagement with the UK's defer department regarding exclusion for Scotland's deposit return scheme from the internal markets act? Does she have any idea why claims that contact with the UK Government is recent and late are being made? Does she agree that this is not only inaccurate, but smacks of a last minute political interference from the Scotland office? I thank the member very much for this question. On commenting on the investment, it is an estimate of £300 million invested by the private sector in Scotland in ending the blight of litter on our streets as we move toward the scheme. That is a substantial investment, and the scheme will create over 500 jobs. That is a significant contribution to our circular economy. As I said out in my statement, there is an agreed and published process between the UK Government and devolved Governments for excluding certain areas from the internal market act. We have been following that process for excluding the deposit return scheme regulations from the internal market act, and that has been the subject of discussion with the UK Government for many months. It is disappointing that some UK Government ministers are trying to portray this as recent and late, given the levels of productive engagement that we have had with DEFRA and other UK departments on the subject. Yesterday, we took the unusual step of publishing the correspondence with the UK Government, as well as a detailed timeline to confirm what I have been saying in the chamber. It is also the same process that we went through to protect Scotland's ban on many single-use plastics from the internal market act that we passed last year. The DRS scheme will add up to 40p per container at point of sale. Can the minister tell the chamber of any investigations done and any conclusions reached on what impact that will have on both inflation and consumer purchase behaviours? I thank the member very much for the question. The member will know that, during the committee sessions way back before 2020, before those were passed, all the evidence into the business case for the deposit return scheme was looked at in great deal by the committee. I would recommend that the member goes back and looks through the detail that he is interested in around the business case. The deposit return scheme, as I said in my statement, is similar to other schemes around the world. There is a precedent for how that works and how those schemes are implemented around the world. I am looking forward to Scotland's scheme going live. When people pay their 20p to buy their juice, return their bottle and get their 20p back, they are doing not only the right thing for the environment but the right thing for their communities. Minister, as you said, regulations for a deposit return scheme received cross-party support in 2020. According to ZeroWay Scotland research, 70 per cent of the Scottish public supported the introduction of a DRS. Given the on-going context of the climate crisis, does the minister think that the case for the scheme remains just as strong now as it was then? Absolutely. The benefits of DRS are clear to see. I walk along the streets in Edinburgh all the time and see cans and bottles on the ground and think to myself, scheme article, scheme article, that letter will not happen once our scheme is in place. This is why so many countries around the world have operated similar schemes for years and why the EU is requiring all their members to have one in place by 2029. The facts remain clear. Our scheme will reduce littering by a third and increase recycling rates of single-use drinks containers toward 90 per cent and will reduce CO2 emissions by 4 million tonnes over 25 years, the equivalent to taking 83,000 cars off the road. There are two important questions that the minister hasn't answered. This scheme is registration not by litter but by company. The 664 figure, what proportion of all drinks producers or all drinks companies does that represent? Not by volume but in terms of total number of producers. Secondly, while I appreciate that a grace period is being considered, right now, if I was a small drinks producer, I wouldn't know whether this scheme applies to me or not. When will they know? When will that work include? Presiding Officer, can I just ask you one point of guidance? In the statement, the minister described parties here in the chamber as making descriptions of this. She went on to describe those characterisations as being ones of misinformation and deception. I was just wondering if you could provide guidance whether you think that language is parliamentary or not. Before I pass over to the minister, I would say that the content of contributions is generally a matter for the member concerned, but I would remind all members of the need at all times to treat one another with courtesy and respect. That includes in the language that we use in the chamber. I will come to the member's point on the grace period, and I will repeat what I have said earlier, that introducing any form of grace period raises questions that must be fully explored about how that would work operationally and fairly and legally for businesses and communities. There are questions about definitions, registration and enforcement, which must all be worked through. While that consideration is being done, it is still essential that producers register for this scheme. As I have already set out, producers are responsible for more than two billion drinks containers today, so that is 90 per cent of the volume of products on the market. 90 per cent of what you see on the shelves today is covered, and we are working pragmatically and practically to bring all the remaining products on board with the scheme so that they can continue to be sold in Scotland from August 16, because of course that is what we would all like to see. In my island constituency, retailers are generally supportive of the scheme, but they do want to know who will be uplifting items and how regular that will be. Questions have been put to me about how, in very rural areas, small shops, while only selling a relatively small proportion of items in the community compared with supermarkets and online orders, will end up having to process and store the bulk of all items locally. Can the minister say what more the Government can do to engage with small rural retailers on those points? I thank the member very much for this question. Circularity Scotland Limited, the scheme administrator has, after an extensive tender process contracted BIFA to manage the collections of DRS material. BIFA, along with Circularity Scotland, are responsible for identifying the needs of individual businesses that will be operating as return points in order to ensure that collections are appropriately tailored to each individual business's needs, no matter where in Scotland they are. Regarding small retailers, we are continually engaging with businesses of all sizes to ensure that their concerns are addressed. For example, in January, Circularity Scotland announced an increase of 19 per cent in the return handling fees for retailers following consultation with industry. After a torrid few weeks, it is a bold strategy for the minister to come out, sowing and condemning MSPs across parties and companies across the country for raising legitimate concerns. I was contacted by two producers in Orkney last night, one desperately seeking advice as to what to do, the other making it clear that they would not be registering. Given the minister and the Government's recent track record in positing dubious statistics, can the minister please clarify that it is not 90 per cent of producers who have registered, but less than 20 per cent of producers who have registered? Thank you very much. I will try to touch on all the questions that have been raised. I absolutely take the legitimate concerns of small businesses very seriously. That is exactly why we have been working with them on pragmatic measures to make sure that they can fully participate in the scheme. For those businesses that contacted you looking for advice, as I said earlier, each business needs specific advice to their needs and their business models, and I would advise them to contact Circularity Scotland and SIPA directly to get the right advice for their businesses. In terms of what I have said, I have been very clear that what we have registered with the scheme right now is businesses that represent more than 90 per cent of the annual volume of products. When you look at the shelves in shops around Scotland, 90 per cent of those items are now incorporated into the scheme. That builds a significant momentum to that August 16 launch date. From today, we are going to work to bring in the remaining businesses so that all businesses in Scotland can participate. Willie Coffey, to be followed by Mark Ruskell. Can I ask the minister to clarify the arrangements for returning cans and bottles for those people who have to do their weekly shop online from home by reason of infirmity or disability that would prevent them from returning their recycling materials in person? I thank the member very much for this question. It is a very important one. We will shortly be bringing forward amendments to the DRS regulations so that only the largest grocery retailers will initially be obliged to provide an online take-back service. All other businesses will be exempt. That is in response to industry concerns about these matters. That is us listening to industry. We also plan to phase in the take-back obligations on those largest retailers. Therefore, before amending regulations are introduced, further work will be undertaken to identify how elderly and disabled people who may not be able to get to a physical return point will be protected during this phasing in a take-back. That is to ensure that no one is disadvantaged by the scheme. Mark Ruskell, to be followed by Brian Whittle. The revelations that we have heard about the Secretary of State this afternoon are truly shocking. His comments are misleading and he should resign. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Three years after the Scottish Parliament approved our DRS scheme, the UK Government in recent months have made tentative suggestions of a separate scheme for England from 2025. Some in this chamber immediately called for the Scottish scheme to be dropped to align with a non-existent UK Government scheme. Does the Minister agree that this path would have been disastrous for the environment and business? I absolutely agree. His announcement, while welcome, came just seven months away from our launch date. To hit the brakes at that point would have been devastating given how far we have come and the significant investment that has been made. In fact, it is positive for the rest of the UK that here in Scotland we go first and develop the solutions, facilitating the development of a deposit return scheme for the rest of the UK. It is also important to understand that the English scheme, unlike our own, that in Wales and many deposit return schemes around the world excludes glass. Including glass delivers significant environmental benefits and this decision will result in a narrower scheme in England, and that is at odds with our own and that being developed in Wales. Brian Whittle, to be followed by John Mason. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Today I was given sight of a letter from a well-known Scottish drinks producer to Sir Clarity Scotland, which highlights their concerns around the continued lack of clarity around advanced payments, particularly given the comments from SNP leadership candidates who all seem to take a different view from the Minister on the scheme. The letter states in a quote, and the methodology is not clear and has not been shared with us, so we do not know how our potential exposure can be calculated. It goes on to make clear that they have only signed the producer agreement because they have been left with no alternative if they want to ensure that they still have a Scottish business after August 16. Does the minister consider it acceptable that producers are so frustrated with the lack of detail in the scheme that they are only prepared to sign up to it at economic gunpoint? As the member will know from a letter that he will have received from Sir Clarity Scotland, Sir Clarity Scotland is a not-for-profit organisation business that was established by 27 producers, retailers, wholesaleers and trade associations. Circularity Scotland exists to help Scottish businesses comply with the regulations passed by this Parliament. I am delighted that that business was able to contact Circularity Scotland to ask for that information, and I would encourage them to continue to work with Circularity Scotland to get that information and implement it in a way that works for their business. John Mason, to be followed by Douglas Ross. Thank you very much. My constituents—and that includes myself—are frustrated at the amount of litter that we see around us in the east end of Glasgow. Glasgow City Council cannot possibly pick it all up. A week past Saturday, I took part in a litter pick, and within an hour I had picked up 17 glass bottles, and that is not to mention cans and plastic bottles as well. So can the minister give me an absolute assurance that she will tackle this litter problem through using the DRS scheme? Absolutely. I can assure the member of that. I share his concern when I walk down streets and see cans and bottles and broken glass. That is a blight on our streets. From August 16 this year, we will be able to reduce that significantly because each of those things is now no longer waste. It is a scheme article worth £20. It is worth picking it up and returning it to a return point. Scotland's deposit return scheme will account for a reduction of about a third of litter, as well as increasing recycling rates of cans and bottles from 90 per cent. The minister has told us that 664 drinks producers in Scotland have signed up for the scheme, out of what total number of drinks producers in Scotland? First Minister. Thanks very much to the member for that question. 664 producers have signed up to the scheme, which, as I have said, represents more than 90 per cent of the total volume of businesses. What the member needs to be clear on is that the volume of materials and the significant number of producers that have signed up means that we now have a viable scheme with momentum to our August 16th, because the businesses have committed and signed on the dotted line. For those businesses that have not yet signed up, we will continue to work with them to bring them online, because we want all some producers to participate in the scheme, so we will be working toward bringing that to 100 per cent of that volume as we move toward August 16th. Fergus Ewing to be followed by Craig Hoy. Presiding Officer, is the minister, and indeed is the permanent secretary, aware of the huge, the huge extra costs that will be incurred, that must necessarily be incurred by businesses between now and mid-April, mid-April being when a new First Minister and Cabinet could halt the scheme? Businesses have told me today and yesterday that the extra costs will amount to between now and April, £15 million from the convenience source, between £10 million and £20 million from hospitality, and a leading craft beer and wine online retailer based in Scotland has stated that it will cost comfortably six figures in the next six weeks, all wasted if the scheme is halted in April. Will she therefore not avoid this wasted expense by calling a halt now and by doing so save massive costs? If not, is she trying to protect the interests of Bifa, a company with a dubious environmental record according to Scotland on Sunday's report last Sunday and other large companies? Is she the great friend of the biggest business and the enemy of Scotland's small businesses? The position of the Scottish Government is that this scheme will launch on August 16, and the member has indeed outlined why this must be so, because businesses have invested over about £300 million in Scotland towards its launch. Those businesses who have made that investment will get that return on their investment, their return handling fees, when those £20 pens start flowing. To delay that, no-one with any credibility speaking for industry would be considering a delay because we need those £20 pens to start flowing so that that investment is well made. We know that businesses on board, a critical mass of businesses, have signed up to the scheme to deliver the scheme. Those producers are taking responsibility to the challenge that this Parliament set them. Will they step up and do their part for the climate emergency, and they have signed on the dotted line and said they would? This scheme will create over 500 jobs. If you are concerned about investment in jobs, you need to back the scheme, and you need to back its launch on August 16 this year. Craig Hoy to be followed by Christine Grahame. Can I ask the minister if the number that she is not prepared to give Parliament is 84 per cent, that 84 per cent of producers have not signed up to her disastrous scheme? Minister, it is a misunderstanding by the member to understand what makes the scheme viable and what builds the momentum. Members, can we please conduct ourselves in a courteous manner? The deposit return scheme is based on proportionality. Therefore, the largest producers contribute the most to the scheme. Therefore, having the largest producers on board builds the momentum that we need toward that August 16 deadline. That is why today's announcement is excellent good news. We will continue to work to bring on board all those small businesses, because we all agree that we want those small businesses to be fully on board with the scheme so that they continue to trade from August 16. I have said it over and over and over again. The members may not be hearing it, but we will be working with those small businesses to bring them on board. Christine Grahame to be followed by Miles Briggs. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I quote from a business in my constituency. We have not signed the contract with Circularity Scotland. Our solicitors said we would be at risk of being derelict in our duties as directors as we would be signing a contract without due care. We have not been given terms and conditions and have not been given any costs from SEPA or Circularity Scotland. Will the minister comment, please? Yes, I am happy to comment. As of today, 664 businesses have signed up, and that represents the full range of drinks producers from global brands to small craft breweries and distilleries. Those 664 businesses had confidence in the scheme and confidence in that agreement. I would absolutely recommend any producer who has questions over that agreement to work them through with Circularity Scotland, who is more than happy to answer any questions and go through the detail with them. I have three members remaining who wish to ask a question. If questions and responses can be brief, we will have time. I call Emma Harper. I am interested to know, minister, what have we learned from other countries? My understanding is that 45 other countries have taken DRS forward. The Scottish Government and other organisations engaged with other countries operating deposit return schemes through the design, business case development and consultation processes for Scotland's DRS, including schemes in Sweden, Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Germany, as well as organisations with broad expertise in the international deposit return schemes such as ReLoop. Circularity Scotland is also maintaining engagement with other schemes around the world. I hope that the minister will reflect on her performance today, because the fact is that over 80 per cent of companies have not signed up to her scheme. Many of them are constituents here in Lothian, who have been desperate to get meetings with the minister and who have been ignored. Those are small businesses. Those are people who are having sleepless nights over this scheme, and those are people who believe that this could drive their business to the wall. Can I say to the minister, can she reflect on this, and can she also applaudologise today to these businesses? I very much hope that businesses will be reassured by the announcement today that the scheme has the confidence of their colleagues and of their competitors. If they wish to continue to trade in Scotland, they will engage with Circularity Scotland and SIPA to fully participate. As I have said, and I hope that that will prevent the sleepless nights, we will allow producers to continue to register with the scheme, and I encourage them to do so so that they can continue to trade in Scotland. The minister might not want to listen to Opposition parties and to candidates for the SNP leadership, but she needs to listen to the voices of Scottish business. In response to her statement, the Scottish chambers of commerce have just said this. The ministerial statement on the deposit return scheme has completely ignored concerns from Scottish firms. Our call was to pause the scheme and redesign it with the business community, and that call has been rejected by the minister. It has been clear to the business community for some time that operating this poorly designed scheme in its current form is impossible and is adding cost pressures on businesses. Why is not the minister listening? Today's announcement of 90 per cent of the volume of products being registered with the scheme is a significant milestone for the scheme. That means that the scheme is a viable go for August 16 of this year. I speak to business all the time. Yesterday, when I was speaking to some producers who were finishing their registrations for the scheme, they were saying to me that the one thing that we need from you, minister, is to make sure that the scheme goes live on August 16. That is what we need from you, as a commitment to that date, so that when we sign on the bottom line, we know what we are signing up to, and that is absolutely what I am committing to. What businesses have asked me, and that is going live on the 16th of August? May I raise the point of order of which notice has been given to your office, Presiding Officer? Under our standing orders as a whole, and in particular under chapter 14, the laying and publication of documents, and having regard to the clearly defined duties incumbent upon the permanent secretary as the accountable officer, as prescribed in the Public Finance Manual, annex 1, paragraph 2, may I ask of those any means by which the permanent secretary can be called here to make a statement and answer questions from MSPs across all parties who have serious concerns with regard to those duties. As the accountable officer, he has a specific duty where any one of the four tests of regularity, propriety, value for money and feasibility are breached, he must seek from Scottish Government ministers a ministerial direction. On 15 February, along with MSP colleagues Maurice Golden, Claire Baker and Liam McArthur, we wrote to the permanent secretary asking that he seek a ministerial direction in respect of the deposit return scheme of the Scottish Government and also the plan to implement it in August. We provided him this out of courtesy in private with a fair opportunity to reply to our request for a meeting to discuss a fortnight ago. I have had no such reply. I have this morning notified that I was making a point of order regarding him today, as that is only courteous. This scheme may decimate small producers, hike beverage costs as even the chief executive of CSL admits, damage to the environment with millions of extra car miles and a reduction in the amount of glass recycling for bottles will go to landfill instead, penalise local authorities and cause massive job losses in small businesses whose life work will be ruined. Is the permanent secretary who is reported to earn a starting salary of up to £180,000 a year going to come here to explain why, if he has sought such a direction and if not, why not? If there is no way in procedural terms that he can appear either willingly or otherwise before a plenary session, then can he in fact be called the accountable officer because in that circumstance he would be, by definition, unaccountable? I thank the member for advance notice of his point of order. The Parliament may require a person to give evidence concerning any subject for which a member of the Scottish Government has general responsibility, but it would be for a relevant committee to consider whether it would seek to use those powers in terms of plenary sessions, the terms of the Scotland Act 1998 mean that only members of the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish law officers can participate in proceedings. I am grateful, Presiding Officer. Repeatedly, the minister failed to answer a similar question from across the chamber about the total number of producers in Scotland who could sign up to the scheme. We know that 664 have. Either the minister in the Scottish Government do not know that figure, or the minister has refused repeatedly in the chamber this afternoon to give that figure. I therefore ask if you will investigate if the Scottish Government do know what the actual figure is, and if they do, will you recall the minister to answer the questions that she has refused to answer this afternoon? I would reiterate that the content of members' contributions is a matter for the member unless it contravenes standing orders with regard to scrutiny. That is a matter for all members of the chamber and they may employ all the various mechanisms that are available to them. At this point, I conclude this item of business and we now move on to the next item, which is a Scottish Government debate on the dementia strategy. I will allow a moment for members to reorganise themselves.