Scotland's deposit-return recycling scheme fiasco should shame politicians who fail to work together
Failure to work constructively together created a shambles which caused controversy, anguish, and wasted millions.
Taxpayers may wish to breathe a sigh of relief. A claim by waste management company Biffa for more than £50 million of compensation from the Scottish Government over the failed deposit-return recycling scheme (DRS) has been thrown out by a court.
Given the firm was not the only one that spent money in preparation for the introduction of the DRS, this may mean that ministers have dodged a considerably more expensive bullet.
Biffa claimed that former Scottish Green minister Lorna Slater had guaranteed, in a letter sent to them in 2022, that the DRS would go ahead and that this “amounted to a negligent misrepresentation”. However, Lord Sandison dismissed their argument as “wishful thinking”.


Not quite a done deal
In the letter, Ms Slater said the Scottish Government’s commitment to the scheme was “unwavering” and that if Biffa signed a contract with Circularity Scotland Ltd, which went bust when the DRS fell apart, this would be “would be a major vote of confidence in both CSL and DRS, and help to maintain and increase momentum towards successful delivery”.
Despite the optimistic tone, her remarks do implicitly suggest it was not quite a done deal. And, when the then Scottish Secretary Alistair Jack subsequently refused to grant the DRS Bill an exception from the UK’s Internal Market Act – necessary to allow glass bottles to be included – the scheme collapsed.
READ MORE: SNP under fire for 'costly wasted opportunity' to cut waste and boost re-use and recycling
Ms Slater may not have given a legally binding guarantee, but what this case does highlight is the complete shambles around a project. And it was a shambles which never needed to happen.
A deposit return scheme is not a bad idea, it is a good one, and indeed may well happen UK-wide.
Other countries have successfully introduced such schemes successfully and, it seems, with little fuss or over-engineered red tape.
By working constructively together, the two governments could have surely circumvented the controversy, the anguish for so many, and the wasted millions.
Comments
Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.
