Net Zero and Just Transition
Good afternoon. The first item of business is portfolio questions on net zero and just transition. If a member wishes to ask a supplementary question, they should press their request-to-speak button during the relevant question, or enter the letters RTS in the chat function.
Net Zero Projects (Engagement with United Kingdom Government)
To ask the Scottish Government what recent engagement it has had with the United Kingdom Government regarding projects in Scotland that will contribute to meeting net zero targets. (S6O-02180)
Ministers and officials regularly meet UK Government counterparts to press for the action that is needed to meet net zero. For instance, I attend the monthly interministerial group for net zero, energy and climate change, alongside representatives of the Governments of the four nations.
The most recent meeting, which took place last week and which I chaired, was on the urgent need for grid infrastructure upgrades. That is one key area in which we are pushing for action, alongside transmission charging and progress on the Scottish Cluster. Those areas are critical to net zero. If the UK Government does not want to act on them, then it must devolve responsibility for those matters to the Scottish Parliament, so that we can.
Given that Andrew Bowie, Parliamentary Under-secretary of State for the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, told the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee last week that he
“would be overwhelmingly delighted should Acorn be successful through the track 2 process”
and that it was
“vital to Scotland’s 2045 net zero ambition ... that we get more carbon capture and storage on stream across the whole of the United Kingdom”,—[Official Report, Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, 27 April 2023; c 10.]
does the cabinet secretary agree that it is vital that the UK Government finally delivers long overdue carbon capture funding for the Scottish Acorn project?
I agree with Jackie Dunbar that it is absolutely vital that the UK Government provides clarity on funding for Acorn and that the Scottish Cluster is part of track 2. It is inexplicable to all observers that Acorn was excluded from track 1. We urgently need a concrete timeline for track 2, instead of the vague commitments that have been given to provide further updates in the summer.
The fact of the matter is that we are in a climate emergency. Scotland is very fortunate to have natural resources to help us tackle it, but, while the UK Government has powers over our natural resources, we are at its will, and I am afraid that we are at risk of being left behind.
We all support the Scottish cluster, particularly the UK Government, which has provided more than £41 million in carbon capture funding. Given the sentiments that the cabinet secretary has expressed, can she tell the chamber how much of the £80 million that the Scottish Government promised to the Scottish Cluster in February last year, rounded to the nearest £1, has been paid over?
As ever, there is a large dose of irony and, I would have to say, hypocrisy in the questions that are coming from members on the Tory benches.
How much?
Members. Let us hear the answer.
The Government is investing heavily in supporting Scotland’s transition to net zero, not least with £500 million over 10 years through our just transition fund and £75 million through our energy transition fund. However, the member is challenging me to put a figure on investment in carbon capture, use and storage, when it is his party in Government down south that has failed to do what only it could do and prioritise Acorn for track 1 status. I will wait with bated breath for a date on the closure of track 2.
Low-carbon Heating in Homes (Installation Incentives)
To ask the Scottish Government whether it plans to introduce financial incentives to encourage households to install low-carbon heating in their homes, to help reach net zero by 2045. (S6O-02181)
We have allocated £1.8 billion for heat and energy efficiency improvements, including an existing package of grants and interest-free loans, which has recently been made more generous and flexible. The green heat finance task force’s forthcoming interim report, exploring options for scaling up existing financial products, will help to shape our policy for encouraging low-carbon heating investment from the second half of the decade. Decarbonising Scotland’s buildings will require a mix of public and private finance. It will sit within a wider package of measures, including regulation to provide market certainty, develop supplier and skills capacity and enhance information provision.
As the minister will be aware, the Scottish Government’s consultation on its draft energy strategy and just transition plan closes a week today. A response this week from the Just Transition Partnership sets out just how inadequate the plans are in their current form, in that they barely exist at all. The Just Transition Partnership has stated that
“Home Energy Efficiency appears peripheral rather than central to this strategy.”
and that
“Engagement with drafting the strategy has been poor.”
I note the minister’s answer. Given that the average cost for the installation of an air source heat pump is between £7,000 and £14,000 and that ground source pumps are far more expensive, will the minister give some detail about where grants are going and who is benefiting from them? Are there targets for the number of installations the Government hopes to reach each year?
There may be some differences in expectation here. We have always been clear that the detail of our heat in buildings programme, which has already been consulted on at a high level, will be subject to a detailed consultation that we will publish this spring. The detail of our heat in buildings regulations, and of the large amount of support that we are providing to households and organisations to help them decarbonise their buildings, will be included there.
I hope that Labour colleagues, and others who are urging us to go further, will welcome the ambitious programme that we are setting out. For example, £7,500 per household for heat pump installation, with an additional uplift for those living in rural areas, is a substantially higher level of support than any that exists elsewhere in the United Kingdom. In addition to that, there are grant and loan schemes for energy efficiency.
That package, taken along with our investment in supply chains to ensure that the cost of insulation will reduce over time, means that we are balancing an ambitious package of regulations with a generous package of support to ensure that the heat transition works for everyone.
Sustainable Aviation Fuel (Development)
To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to support the development of sustainable aviation fuel in Scotland. (S6O-02182)
Transitioning to sustainable aviation fuel is an essential part of the global endeavour to decarbonise aviation.
In developing our aviation strategy, the Scottish Government will consider all responses to our public consultation, including those supporting investment in SAF. In addition, Transport Scotland is working with Scottish Enterprise, which has commissioned an SAF supply chain study, to review the economic opportunity for Scotland. That review takes into account a new report by Sustainable Aviation that suggests that SAF production in the United Kingdom could create 10,000 jobs initially. We will consider all such material as we determine our potential actions on SAF.
Aviation is a critical part of Scotland’s transport infrastructure, bringing 2 million visitors to Scotland each year, who in turn spent £2.5 billion here. The industry is also worth £2.5 billion in its own right.
Net zero poses a real challenge. Electric aviation will be suitable only for short hops and hydrogen aviation fuel is some way off. Sustainable air fuel is therefore important, but we must make decisions about how we revitalise our petrochemical infrastructure. We also know that biomass comes with substantial opportunity costs.
What detailed steps have been taken to evaluate the opportunity costs of biomass? What planning framework will be in place so that any projects will be genuinely co-led by Government and industry?
In my initial answer, I set out the work being undertaken by Government, Transport Scotland and Scottish Enterprise. The SAF mapping exercise commissioned by Scottish Enterprise will provide a far more robust evidence base to allow us to consider whether and how the Scottish Government can support SAF production in Scotland.
Some measures in that regard are already being undertaken in Scotland. For example, Highland and Islands Airports Limited recently made SAF available at Inverness airport, and many other schemes are under way. We will continue moving forward on that front to ensure that aviation becomes sustainable and we will keep Parliament informed.
In March, the cross-party group on aviation published a report that called for the creation of an SAF industry in Scotland and for it to be supported by the Scottish Government and the Scottish National Investment Bank. The minister seems to accept the potential for SAF, and he said that its production could create up to 10,000 jobs. What is he doing to unlock that potential? Is he in talks with the United Kingdom Government about doing so?
Of course, the Scottish Government talks to the UK Government on a number of issues. I point out to Mr Simpson and the rest of the Parliament that regulation of aviation remains reserved, and the UK Government’s jet zero strategy will apply throughout the UK. The sector has repeatedly called on the UK Government to introduce a price support mechanism for SAF, given its high cost, and I agree with the sector that the UK Government should do that. Sustainable Aviation’s new report reiterates that request and notes:
“If UK SAF support schemes are not established soon, there is a risk of missing out on creating a UK SAF industry.”
Of course, the Scottish Government and I will do all that we can to prod and cajole the UK Government into putting that mechanism in place, and I hope that Mr Simpson will support us on that.
Transport Links (Highlands and Islands)
To ask the Scottish Government what analysis it has undertaken of any potential impact on local communities of the reported deterioration of vital transport links in the Highlands and Islands region. (S6O-02183)
An assessment of Scotland’s strategic transport network was undertaken as part of the second strategic transport projects review. The final recommendations of STPR2 were published on 8 December 2022. The reports include final appraisal and outcomes for the Highlands and Islands region.
My officials at Transport Scotland continue to engage with partners across the Highlands and Islands to monitor strategic transport links, such as trunk roads, ferries and air routes. Where routes are affected by weather or technical incidents, Transport Scotland works with operators, emergency services and local resilience partnerships to resolve issues as efficiently as possible.
There are simply too many areas of concern to ask about in just one question. I could ask about the appalling state of roads across my Highlands and Islands region, the increasing number of CalMac Ferries services that are failing to deliver for the communities that they are meant to serve, or the on-going issues at the Corran Narrows crossing, where residents are still without a vital ferry link and are forced to detour on a much longer road route.
However, I would like to get some clarity from the minister about the disruption to Orkney following the incident involving the MV Pentalina. Although there appears to be no recall option as part of the agreement between CalMac and Pentland Ferries, could CalMac still agree for the MV Alfred to return to its normal Pentland Firth route, if there was a prolonged absence of the MV Pentalina? If yes, what discussions has the minister had with CalMac and Pentland Ferries about that option and any further disruption to west coast routes that it might cause?
As I explained to the chamber on Tuesday, there is no recall element to the contract between CalMac and Pentland Ferries; it is a commercial contract. However, we will continue to monitor the situation with regard to the transportation of goods and people to Orkney. As I explained on Tuesday, we have moved to the summer timetable, so there are three return services a day between Scrabster and Stromness. I explained to the chamber that I will continue to keep a close eye on all of that to see whether further service provision is required. Beyond that, I reiterate the point that it is a commercial contract between CalMac and Pentland Ferries. In the discussions that we have had, neither Pentland nor Orkney Islands Council have called for the recall of MV Alfred.
Does the minister consider that the northern isles lifeline ferry services are operating as best they can on overnight crossings? Booking a cabin is a struggle, booking a cabin with a vehicle is a struggle and booking dates beyond 30 September is not only a struggle but impossible, because the booking system is not open beyond that date.
We will move to open bookings as soon as that is possible. I want to ensure the best possible services for the residents of Orkney and Shetland, and I think that NorthLink Ferries serves them very well indeed. I visited NorthLink in Aberdeen recently, and I was impressed by the changes that it has made to the service to suit the needs of islanders.
I will write to Ms Wishart to give her an indication of when we will move to open that booking system.
Active Travel Projects (Funding Criteria)
To ask the Scottish Government what criteria are used to determine how much funding should be spent on active travel projects. (S6O-02184)
The Scottish Government undertakes annual budget setting in line with the processes set out in the Scottish public finance manual, as well as the commitments made in the programme for government and the Bute house agreement.
The active travel budget forms part of the overall budget for the transport portfolio, taking into account legal or contractual commitments along with other policy commitments. Investment priorities in transport are also set out in the second strategic transport projects review, which was published late last year following extensive public and stakeholder feedback.
Last week, the City of Edinburgh Council confirmed that it must restart a public consultation on making active travel schemes permanent due to errors with bus lanes and yellow lanes, which will cost the taxpayer thousands of pounds.
That is not the first wasteful project led by Sustrans. Given the scale of funding that it receives—in the order of £234 million over five years—will the minister commit to reviewing whether Sustrans is providing value for money and listening to the genuine concerns of local residents?
I am happy to explore with the City of Edinburgh Council any issues or concerns that it has about that situation. Very clearly, if we are remotely serious about our climate ambitions in relation to transport, as well as the wider economic, social and health benefits from active travel, and if we are serious about the 20 per cent car kilometres reduction target and the role that active travel can play in that regard, investment in that is not only value for money but a long-term priority. The countries that have seen a transformation in active travel have achieved it with strong local leadership and long-term investment. That is the opportunity that Scotland has to make that change.
We are also undertaking a transformation project on active travel because we know that delivery models will need to change to match the scale of ambition and the scale of budgets that we have now and that are coming next year. There will be more to say on the results of that transformation project later in the year.
I listened to the minister’s answers with some interest. Will he give us an indication of how much the Scottish Government spends on active travel compared with the rest of the United Kingdom?
Not only has the overall budget for active travel risen to a record £189 million this year as part of our commitment of £320 million—10 per cent of the transport budget—by 2024-25, at the same time, we have seen a sad lack of similar commitment in many parts of the United Kingdom outside of Scotland. Outside of London, the spending per head is just £1.
James Dornan and I both represent Glasgow. Glasgow now has an ambitious long-term plan for a network development of active travel routes. If we want to see that opportunity turn into a reality, it requires a long-term commitment to funding from the Scottish Government, and that is what we are determined to deliver.
The Government’s new “Cycling Framework for Active Travel—A Plan for Everyday Cycling” includes welcome commitments for infrastructure developments. That is an exciting opportunity for new unionised and green public sector job creation. Will the minister confirm how many such jobs the Scottish Government expects the framework to create, and what discussions it has had with trade unions about developing those jobs?
I do not have a figure for job projections with me at the moment, but I would be happy to write to the member about that. I am pleased that she shares the enthusiasm for the opportunity to transform Scotland’s towns, villages, cities and communities and to make active travel not only the natural choice but the safe and attractive choice for a far greater proportion of the journeys that we make.
I welcome the record level of investment that we are seeing from the Scottish Government. It is partly a result of the Bute house agreement and Greens being in government and of successive budget deals in Parliament.
Does the minister agree that delivering the capital infrastructure that keeps the cyclists, the wheelers and the walkers separate from motor vehicles is the right priority for the Government, and that to drive up rates of active travel, it is a case of build it and they will come?
Absolutely. That capital investment is a record already, and it is set to rise next year. We are keen to work not only with local authorities but with the third sector to ensure that the local leadership matches the scale of investment.
I mentioned that, outside of London, just £1 a head is being spent on active travel in other parts of England. In comparison, the Scottish Government’s spending sits at £34 a head and will rise next year to £58 a head. That is the kind of commitment that is required if we are going to make the transformational change that this Government is determined to see happen.
Deposit Return Scheme (Launch Date)
To ask the Scottish Government what process informed its previous decision to launch the deposit return scheme on 16 August 2023, including any input that it sought from industry regarding its readiness for that date. (S6O-02185)
The launch date of 16 August 2023 for Scotland’s deposit return scheme was informed by a five-month assessment process. It accounted for the findings of the gateway review that was conducted in June 2021, independent advice, review of Circularity Scotland’s implementation plan and feedback from a wide range of stakeholders. That launch date was announced in Parliament on 14 December 2021.
The minister has been at pains to assure us that the scheme is industry led. However, in a written submission, Circularity Scotland said:
“Circularity Scotland’s advice to Ministers had been that the most appropriate time to ‘go live’ would be in Spring 2024. However ... the government’s preferred implementation date”
was 16 August. Will the minister explain to the chamber, and to the thousands of businesses that are struggling to get to grips with this shambles of a DRS, why she knew better than the industry?
Circularity Scotland was one of many stakeholders that were included in the five-month assessment process that I outlined. Those stakeholders included those who were vociferous in wanting us to launch in 2022, those who wanted a short delay and those who wanted a longer delay. I chose 16 August as a challenging but deliverable date for the industry, and, as we have seen, many businesses were ready to go for launch on 16 August. That is why there have been letters from businesses, which are publicly available, to me and to the United Kingdom Government asking us not to delay past 16 August.
Yesterday, Circularity Scotland told me that the DRS launch date of 16 August 2023 would have allowed only a few weeks for all stakeholders to test implementation. What consideration has the minister given to the period of time that is available to test the new DRS arrangements, given the new launch date? How long will that information be available to the industry, so that businesses can test implementation of the scheme in advance?
I thank the member for that really good question. In lots of ways, the industry is still working towards the 16 August date, in that the speed of implementation has not slowed down. As I said in my earlier answer, the launch date of 16 August was always a challenging one for the industry. It was absolutely deliverable, but it was a challenge. It meant that there was limited space for testing and, as we know, very little space for contingencies.
We now have 10 months until the new launch date. That gives businesses not only more time to get ready, which has been welcomed by some businesses, but a very extensive window for thorough end-to-end testing of the system. I know that that will ensure that customers have the best possible experience on the launch date.
Was the minister working on a proposal to delay the launch date beyond August while also assuring businesses that their investment was going towards an August launch? Yes or no.
I am a little confused by the member’s question. Given the delay to the UK Government issuing an exclusion to the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, I was, of course, working with my officials on options for how to deal with that uncertainty, so that we could make sure that we would have a successful launch of our deposit return scheme. I worked with officials to come up with different options. I recommended to the First Minister that we should launch on 1 March next year, and he accepted that. However, that uncertainty remains. Until the UK Government issues us with that exclusion, businesses in Scotland will face uncertainty, which is the last thing that they need.
Green Skills Training (Discussions)
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with industry bodies and colleges regarding the provision of green skills training for green jobs of the future. (S6O-02186)
Skills are a critical component of the transition to a net zero wellbeing economy. Ministers and officials regularly engage with a range of stakeholders on the demand for and provision of skills for a green economy. That includes senior representatives from industry and colleges, who are represented on the implementation steering group for our “Climate Emergency Skills Action Plan 2020-2025”.
Last November, I hosted a round-table session with college and university representatives to discuss green skills training and provision, and I look forward to further engagement with them on our mutual goal of an education and skills system that is agile and responsive to the opportunities and changing demands that arise as a result of the transition to net zero.
Given the announcement this week on college funding, there is great unease in the energy sector that the transition to net zero energy jobs will be hampered. What assurances can the minister give that adequate resources will be in place for our colleges and for training places so that we can meet our goals and boost the number of green jobs by using the transferable skills from the oil and gas sector? The energy sector needs clarity from the Green-Scottish National Party Government.
Our college sector is very important to us in delivering green skills. I most recently met Scottish colleges in February to discuss green skills, so I am absolutely aware of the key role that they play in delivering those skills. We are facing the most challenging financial environment since devolution, and very difficult decisions have had to be made across portfolios. The Scottish Government continues to spend nearly £2 billion a year on Scotland’s universities and colleges through the Scottish Funding Council alone, research and innovation funding for universities has increased and additional funding has been allocated for high-priority maintenance across college estates.
I can squeeze in question 8 if I can have brief questions, please, and answers to match.
Public Transport (Antisocial Behaviour)
To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to address antisocial behaviour on public transport. (S6O-02187)
The Scottish Government is committed to tackling antisocial behaviour and promoting safer, stronger communities where people take responsibility for their actions and how they affect others. The police, local authorities and other local agencies are responsible for tackling antisocial behaviour at the local level. Those agencies, empowered by the Scottish Government, work in a concerted and co-ordinated way to effectively tackle the problem.
I encourage anyone who witnesses such incidents to report the behaviour to their local authority’s antisocial behaviour team and to report all criminal behaviour to Police Scotland or the British Transport Police.
The minister will be aware that there has been an increase in antisocial behaviour on Lothian Buses. Such activity, which includes vandalism, can relate to cancelled or diverted buses, and it can result in police officers being called to disturbances on board buses. Such behaviour will deter people from using public transport, and they will instead turn to private vehicles, which will increase carbon emissions on our roads. Will the minister instruct Transport Scotland to run a national campaign to change behaviour and make local buses safer for all passengers?
It has been suggested by some people that some of the antisocial behaviour is linked to the launch of free bus travel for young people. I am not convinced that that is the case, because I think that most of our young people behave in a good manner. However, we will evaluate that scheme one year after its launch and look at all aspects of it.
I will certainly consider Mr Balfour’s suggestion for a campaign. I will write to him in due course on that issue.
That concludes portfolio question time. Before we move on to the next item of business, there will be a short pause to allow front-bench teams to change position, should they so wish.
Air ais
Firefighters Memorial Day 2023