˿

Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 25 December 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1037 contributions

|

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Ecocide (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Michael Matheson

Good morning. I want to stick with the thresholds for liability in the bill. You will have heard and read some of the evidence that the committee has received, which raises questions about whether the thresholds are appropriate, largely on the basis that the provisions do not include negligence. Currently, section 1 requires intent or recklessness, and the threshold for responsible officials is “consent or connivance”. Could you explain why you have chosen not to include negligence in the provision?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Ecocide (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Michael Matheson

A criminal conviction is not required to pursue a proceeds of crime matter. The Crown Office can go to the court and say, “This person has so much wealth that we believe they got it through criminal activity”, and seek a confiscation order. The individual then has to prove that that is not how they gained that wealth. I am just trying to understand how that would interact with the bill.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Ecocide (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Michael Matheson

Okay.

You will have heard in last week’s evidence from the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Action and Energy that the Scottish Government considers that the bill as introduced is not compatible with the European convention on human rights. She referred specifically to section 2(3), which is on establishing a defence of necessity

“on the balance of probabilities”.

Do you believe that the Scottish Government’s view that that is not compatible with the ECHR is correct? If so, what consideration did you give to that when you were drafting the provision in the bill?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Ecocide (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Michael Matheson

I am asking you directly, given that you are the lawyer who has been giving advice on the matter. Do you consider that it is compatible with the ECHR?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Ecocide (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Michael Matheson

Are you of the view that the existing thresholds are sufficient, or do you think that there might be a need to amend them on the basis of the evidence that we have heard to date?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Michael Matheson

In part 2.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Michael Matheson

Parts 2 and 3 of the bill provide regulation-making powers to UK Government ministers. What is the Scottish Government’s position on those powers?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Michael Matheson

You are opposed to it as it stands—is that correct?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Ecocide (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Michael Matheson

Just so that we are clear, although there is a certain policy intention, the provisions of the bill could be applied to any employee.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Ecocide (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Michael Matheson

I seek clarification with regard to the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. I remember serving on a committee, if I recall correctly, that dealt with aspects of that legislation. It deals with the pursuit of assets that have been obtained through illegal activity, rather than criminal offences being committed and some form of remediation being claimed from the perpetrator. Can you clarify how that would work in relation to the bill?

Under the 2002 act, the Crown Office would secure an order of confiscation, and it would then be for the individual to demonstrate that they did not gain those assets through illegal activities. I do not understand how that would apply in this instance. Can you help me to understand that?