 The next item of business is topical questions, and I would advise that if a member wishes to request a supplementary question, they should press the request-to-speak button during the relevant question or enter the letters RTS in the chat function during the relevant question. Again, short questions and succinct answers would be appreciated to get as many members in as possible. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the deposit return scheme in light of the First Minister recently stating that he was actively looking at options around the scheme and that he was taking advice. Delivering a deposit return scheme is an important part of our environmental ambitions and we remain committed to the scheme. However, we continue to need a decision from the UK Government on an exclusion for the scheme from the Internal Market Act. The First Minister and I have also been clear over the last few weeks that we want more to be done to support small businesses to be part of our deposit return scheme. That includes looking at options to address their concerns with a view to identifying solutions that are fair, legal, simple and allow this important scheme to go ahead. The First Minister will provide an update on the Scottish Government's priorities for Scotland this afternoon, including the deposit return scheme. No answer there, Deputy Presiding Officer, but I hope that the Minister will be able to define the scheme, then the UK Government will be able to make a decision on that. With just four months to go for deposit return, major changes have been floated by the Minister and, indeed, the First Minister, yet we do not have any clarity on what they are as we stand here today. Let us get a very easy question for the Minister who has proposed changes around small producers. What is the definition of a small producer? I thank the member for that question. In terms of working with businesses of all sizes, we want all businesses to participate in Scotland's deposit return scheme, which are implicated by the regulations. As I have said, the First Minister will provide an update on the Scottish Government's priorities for Scotland this afternoon, including the deposit return scheme. I will provide further details in my statement to Parliament on Thursday. As the First Minister and I have previously been clear that we want more to be done to support small businesses to be part of our deposit return scheme and we continue to assess the options. No definition, no understanding of the difference between a small producer and a small business, clearly. It is no wonder that this scheme is facing such severe problems. The collections contract for deposit return has been awarded to a multinational company with a dubious environmental record, one welcomed by the Minister. When the Scottish Government in 2021 agreed the proposition of DRS with CSL, they agreed that there would be no new vehicles purchased and no new sheds built, yet 200 gas-guzzling vehicles have been purchased and up to eight new sheds have been built. Why did the Minister not hold Circularity Scotland to account? Scotland's deposit return scheme, just like similar deposit return schemes around the world, and, as passed by this Parliament, is an industry-led scheme. It is led by Circularity Scotland, which is a private, not-for-profit company. Their business decisions are for them to decide. They were set up by producers, retailers and wholesalers. As a private company, it is their decision to make in terms of how they are delivering the scheme for Scotland. I have, as you can imagine, received requests for a number of supplementaries. I very much doubt that I will get them all in, but I will try to take as many as I can, and I call supplementary Christine Grahame. Minister, I understand that the current system of PRNs ends when Circularity system kicks in. Who will benefit from the loss of PRNs and who will disbenefit? The member is referencing the current PRN system, which is a system in place that is part of the producer responsibility system. The deposit return scheme is also a producer responsibility system. We are working with the existing PRN scheme to ensure a transfer from the existing scheme over to the new scheme, such that anyone who participates in the PRN scheme is not being double charged or having to take that producer responsibility twice. In a letter last week to the First Minister, the campaign for pubs spoke for the many small producers in my region when he said, and I quote, DRS exists in many jurisdictions and is the right policy for our time but couldn't be realised in a worse manner than the Scottish proposed scheme. The few winners appear to be large industrial drinks producers in one large recycling company who are delighted in sweeping away of SME competition. Why has the Minister got it so badly wrong that so few small producers have still not signed up for a scheme that they see will destroy their business? I'm sure that the member has that right. Hundreds of small producers have signed up to the scheme. 670 producers have signed up, including many hundreds of small producers. As I've said, the First Minister and I have been clear that we want more to be done to support small businesses, including small producers, to be part of our deposit return scheme. I will not pre-empt the First Minister or myself. The First Minister will provide an update to the Scottish Government's priorities this afternoon and I will provide further details in my statement to Parliament on Thursday. Is the Minister not recognised that the succession of changes in many U-turns that have been made by the Scottish Government on this proposal, as Colin Smith suggested, undermined any prospect of the Government delivering a scheme that has been successfully in operation in countries around the world, but which the Scottish Government has made an absolute shambles of? Does she realise the damage that this is costing to businesses across the country? I don't agree with the characterisation that the member has put towards the scheme. There have been no U-turns. We have been committed to this scheme from the start. What we have been doing is listening to business and systematically working through business interests to make sure that they can participate in the scheme. For example, streamlining the exclusion process, working on cash flow issues, working on labelling issues for smaller runs of products. Those are all things that we have been doing in line with business requests. We will continue to work with businesses as we go forward to make sure that they can all fully participate in this scheme. If the member is concerned about uncertainty, I am sure that the member is as shocked as I am that, with just four months to go, the UK Government continues to keep us and Scottish businesses in limbo by not granting an exclusion from the Internal Markets Act in a timely fashion. That uncertainty is frustrating progress on the scheme and undermining certainty for businesses. I reiterate my call to the UK Government to follow the process and urgently grant the exclusion so that we can give businesses that certainty that they need. According to Circularity Scotland's branding and communications plan, we should be two months into the consumer campaign ramp-up for DRS. Precisely what has been produced has the campaign actually started, and if so, is it on track? The beginning of the communications plan for the Scottish deposit return scheme is to ensure that businesses understand what they need to do. That has been ramped up by Circularity Scotland in the last two months in particular. That is ensuring that producers know what their obligations are and that people acting as return points understand what their obligations are and working them through the process of signing up and fully participating in the scheme. First off, we had the producer registration, we now have return point registration open and then consumer comms will be part of that as that goes forward. In terms of communicating with the consumers, all of these steps are part of that communication plan. Last week, in our left to the First Minister, the Chambers of the Federation of Small Business, the Scotch-Whiskey Association, the CBI and many other business organisations, virtually all of them argued that the DRS would increase consumer prices above the 20p hitting the poorest hardest. Even David Harris, the boss of CSL, paid £300,000 a year, admits that that is the case. Does the minister agree with the boss of her own agency? If so, why is she so intent as a Green Party representative on imposing at the height of a cost of living crisis, price heights to the poorest people in Scotland, a kind of green poll tax? I will remind the member that Circulary Scotland is a private not-for-profit company, not an agency of the Scottish Government. I will also remind the member that the regulations for the deposit return scheme were passed by this Parliament and we are implementing those regulations. How much additional revenue does the Scottish Government anticipate that local authorities will be able to raise in light of its reported proposals to enable them to double council tax on second homes? As set out in the business regulatory impact assessment published alongside our joint consultation with COSLA, we estimate additional revenues of up to £35 million nationally. Our proposals would give councils discretionary powers to set fairer and more appropriate council tax levels to support thriving communities and to prioritise homes for living. That, in conjunction with other actions such as our investment in building an additional 110,000 affordable homes, will contribute to achieving our aim for everyone in Scotland to live in a safe, warm and secure home in the place that they want to be. People say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, so I am delighted that the Government has decided to proceed with our proposals for an empty home's council tax escalator. That is something that we believe could raise an additional £30 million on top of the £35 million that the minister has mentioned. The longer someone leaves a home empty the more that absent owner should pay. Dragging out the doubling of council tax on second homes with yet more consultation is typical of this Government, wasting time depriving of communities of the cash that councils could collect them right now. Can the minister confirm that primary legislation to deliver a council tax escalator key to its new deal for local government will be ready for councils to deliver in the next financial year? The actions that we are taking reflect commitments that we gave via our housing for 2040 strategy and indeed the bute house agreement. The member, I appreciate from the calm waters of opposition, would recognise that his job is to simply call for things. In government we have to deliver and in delivering legislation we do have a responsibility to consult, not least because engagement is a key part of our framework for tax. I encourage all members and stakeholders across Scotland to engage in this process. We will have an opportunity via the existing legislative framework, subject to the consultation, to introduce measures as of the next financial year of 2425, as is set out in the consultation papers to go beyond that, would require primary legislation. Of course we will consider the feedback that we receive from the consultation very carefully and update Parliament in due course. In his announcement yesterday, the First Minister said that those powers will help to free up housing. That is absolutely an ambition that we share because we need to use the stock that we have and we need to use it in a better way. Missing from that set of proposals were powers for local councils to be able to force the sale or rent of our property. To deliver Labour's £1 home scheme for aspiring homeowners or even the First Minister's key workers' homes proposals to create a comprehensive package of powers to tackle long-term empty homes and homelessness. The Government said that it would deliver those powers for compulsory rent and sale powers. Land commission and empty homes partnership have agreed, so if the legislation that the First Minister has talked about will include those powers. I cannot speak to legislation that will emerge via the consultation process, but the member does raise a number of serious issues. I am sure that my colleague the housing minister, Paul McLean, on particular aspects of housing would be happy to engage. As with regards to the matters around council tax and local taxation more generally and specifically how it can be used to achieve what I think are shared ambitions around housing, I am more than happy to engage with the member on the detail during the consultation process and after. In a spirit of being collegiate and in co-operation, I welcome the Labour Party's support for the Scottish Government's proposals. I have three requests for supplementaries. I would like to take all three, but I would need co-operation from members to have brief questions and succinct answers. Supplementary Jim Fairlie. Given the clear and pressing issues in the lack of local housing in rural locations, particularly in mines in Persia, South and Cynrosia, does the minister believe that doubling the council levy will be sufficient? Can the minister also outline what other measures could be implemented to enable local authorities to achieve the policy aims of easing those housing pressures? The consultation invites views on the scale of council taxes that would be appropriate to apply to second and empty homes. I am pleased to say that, subject to the consultation outcome, we will be able to charge double-rate on second homes from April 2024. However, we are certainly interested in views on granting powers for the further than 100 per cent increase in the longer term. This is one of a strand of the raft of measures that we are taking forward to ease housing pressures in rural areas, more of which will be announced in the First Minister's forthcoming statement. I am concerned that people on modest wages just cannot afford to live locally, particularly in areas such as the East Newcofife. It has also affected the sustainability of those communities as well. I am not sure, just like Jim Fairlie, whether doubling the council tax on its own will be enough. Some people will happily pay that extra council tax to keep their second home. Did he look at measures such as licensing and planning powers to control the number of second homes? The member will, of course, be aware of the work that we have undertaken around the short term let's go through the planning system and licensing. However, he does make a point that tax and isolation is not going to necessarily achieve the outcomes that we want to see, but it can be an important tool. What we are looking at through the consultation is primarily the issue around council tax for empty homes and for second homes. In the short term, from Nick's financial year, we have been able to double the existing council tax levy, but we are looking to go beyond that. That would require change via primary legislation. We are also looking at the thresholds around non-domestic rates, which apply to short term let's as well. As a number of areas have been covered in the consultation, I would be more than happy to engage with any member on the detail of that. Doubling the council tax on second and holiday homes is great and well-come progress, but I am really glad that the Scottish Government is interested in going further than that. Can the minister confirm whether the legislation that would be required to go further will come in the form of a new bill, or if it will be part of upcoming legislation that is already planned, such as the local democracy or housing bills, and regardless of which method it takes in which financial year the Government expects local authorities to have that power to go further than 200 per cent? Subject to the responses from the consultation, we will take immediate action to the extent possible in secondary legislation to deliver changes in time for the 2024-25 financial year, which will allow for a premium of up to 100 per cent to be charged. Changes to allow councils to charge an excessive 100 per cent premium in council tax on second homes and long-term entry properties would, as I mentioned earlier, require primary legislation, so the outcome of that would be determined upon the parliamentary process. Subject to the various responses that we have received from the consultation, we will assess the different routes to introduce changes, including any plan that is ledged to vehicles such as the local democracy bill. I would be happy to hear Parliament and the member on G-course.