The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Displaying 1969 contributions
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 December 2025
Douglas Lumsden
The threshold of liability for senior responsible officials of an organisation is consent or connivance. The committee has heard that “consent, connivance or neglect” would be more in keeping with comparable provisions. Does the Government have a view on that? Should neglect be added?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 December 2025
Douglas Lumsden
No. I mentioned consent or connivance.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 December 2025
Douglas Lumsden
With regard to vicarious liability, what is your view of contractors that do work for the main company, for example?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 December 2025
Douglas Lumsden
If a contracting company was not following proper procedures and then caused an incident, where would the buck stop?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 December 2025
Douglas Lumsden
So you think that that is covered.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 December 2025
Douglas Lumsden
Thank you.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 December 2025
Douglas Lumsden
Yes, I have. I want to pick up on your last point, cabinet secretary. Were you suggesting that, if ecocide could not be proved in court, a prosecution could be achieved using the 2014 act?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 December 2025
Douglas Lumsden
I am trying to think how such a provision would work. The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service might decide to go down the ecocide route to take a case to court, but, during the trial, it might think, “We’re not going to meet the high bar for ecocide,” and decide to switch to a section 40 prosecution. Is that what you are saying? In other words, are you talking about making it possible for someone to be found not guilty of ecocide but then to be retried under section 40 of the 2014 act?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 December 2025
Douglas Lumsden
Therefore, you think that, if a company is following a proper process, it is the contracting company that—
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 December 2025
Douglas Lumsden
Is that explicit enough in the bill so that people understand that, or are changes needed?