Official Report 999KB pdf
Net Zero and Energy, and Transport
The next item of business is portfolio question time. I remind members who wish to ask a supplementary question to press their request-to-speak button during the relevant question.
Onshore Wind Farm Public Inquiries
I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests.
To ask the Scottish Government what additional support it will provide to local authorities in relation to holding public inquiries into onshore wind farms. (S6O-04113)
Improving planning skills and capacity is a key commitment and priority for the Scottish Government. Together with the Improvement Service, we offer planning authorities training on appeals processes including public local inquiries. We have also been working closely with the United Kingdom Government on its review of Scottish consenting, which included a recent public consultation on potential reforms to the UK Electricity Act 1989. Those reforms are intended to mandate early engagement with statutory consultees to increase application quality and reduce the need for public local inquiries.
The Hill of Fare wind farm proposal has been unanimously opposed by Aberdeenshire Council and the wider community. Over the 50-year lifespan of the project, the developer, Renewable Energy Systems Ltd, would generate around £1.2 billion of income at today’s prices and the landowner, Dunecht Estates, would be paid more than £140 million in rent, while the community benefit would amount to only £26 million. If Dunecht Estates does not withdraw the application by 21 January, there will need to be a public inquiry at further cost to Aberdeenshire Council, despite whistleblowers in Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks telling me that it is already a done deal as they prepare connections.
Does the minister believe that those who profit so obscenely from the destruction of a community should bear the cost of the public inquiry, particularly at a time when councils are so stretched for cash?
The member is well aware that I simply cannot comment on a live application of the kind that he mentions. I reiterate what I said about the fact that, looking into the future, the Scottish Government is happy to work with the UK Government on finding solutions and reform around the planning system. However, as I said, the member knows full well that I cannot comment on a live application.
Reaching our net zero goal should be done in collaboration with local communities, which must see the benefits of the Scottish Government’s efforts to kick-start Scotland’s green reindustrialisation. Can the minister say any more about the twin aims of ensuring a fair process while decarbonising the country?
There are twin aims, and it is vital that people and communities share the wealth of Scotland’s abundant renewable energy resources and net zero transition. Through our good-practice principles for onshore development, the Scottish Government continues to encourage developers to offer community benefits as standard on all renewable energy projects. Community benefits are a well-established and integral part of renewable energy projects in Scotland, with more than £30 million of community benefits being offered to Scottish communities in the past 12 months.
New Oil and Gas Licences
To ask the Scottish Government whether it has a policy of a presumption against new oil and gas licences. (S6O-04114)
As the member will be aware, decisions on offshore oil and gas licensing and consenting are reserved to the United Kingdom Government. The Scottish Government’s draft energy strategy and just transition plan includes a proposal for consultation of support for a presumption against licensing for exploration to identify entirely new fields. We have never proposed a policy of no new licensing at all. Where fields are already identified but are not yet in production, we consulted on support for those continuing to progress through the licensing and consenting process, subject to a robust climate compatibility checkpoint.
The judgments and issues in the strategy are informed and influenced by recent developments in the UK Government’s energy policy and court decisions. This is a rapidly changing landscape and we are taking time to reflect on those developments and the strategy before drawing any conclusions and publishing any final strategy.
I do not think that anyone will be the wiser as to where the Scottish Government stands on this after that answer from the minister.
As members will know, the energy sector has fiercely criticised the Government’s uncertain tone when its energy strategy and just transition plan was unveiled last year. That tone has knocked confidence and discouraged industry investment.
Workers in the sector urgently need confidence that the energy transition will protect the livelihoods of their communities across Scotland. A lack of clarity on new oil and gas licences or the future of Scotland’s refinery capacity at Grangemouth does not build confidence. Will the Government now step up with a plan that meets Scotland’s energy security from our own natural resources, and provide a realistic plan to restore the industry confidence that will secure sectoral skills?
I do not think that anyone could be in any doubt, realistically, about the Scottish Government’s commitment not only to finding a just transition but to supporting the jobs that exist in the sector that the member mentioned.
The member also mentioned Grangemouth. I remind her of her exchange with the First Minister on the subject, in which he reacted to the comments that she made about the situation at Grangemouth, saying:
“I am actively pursuing an option to maintain the refining capacity at Grangemouth. If that needs to be stated again, I will state it again to Parliament”.—[Official Report, 21 November 2024; c 17.]
Since 2021, the words and actions of the Government have demonised the oil and gas industry and condemned steps to secure our energy security at Rosebank and Cambo. Can the minister say that the poisoned rhetoric of Nicola Sturgeon, Humza Yousaf and Patrick Harvie has been consigned to history, and will his Government act now to secure the livelihoods of 100,000 people and remove the presumption against oil and gas?
I suggest that the language and rhetoric that has been overstated is that which we heard in the question. I state again that the judgment and issues in the strategy will be informed and influenced by recent developments in UK Government energy policy and by court decisions. Any responsible Government would be expected to do that.
Will the minister acknowledge that the Government’s energy strategy was promised years ago, and that we urgently need confidence for new investment right across Scotland’s supply chains and a just transition for workers, never mind more delays with the strategy or in planning decisions on renewables? When will the Government’s energy strategy and just transition plan be published?
That is not directly related to the original question, but if the minister can add anything by way of response, that would be helpful.
I am not sure that I can add much more, other than to say that the Government will reflect on the issues before drawing any conclusions and publishing any final strategy.
Net Zero (Workforce)
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the net zero secretary has had with ministerial colleagues on how to ensure the delivery of the workforce required to deliver its net zero targets, including through discussions with Skills Development Scotland and colleges. (S6O-04115)
I regularly engage with my education and skills ministerial colleagues to discuss the importance of the net zero workforce. Scotland is already leading the way in the creation of green jobs. New PwC data shows that the Scottish green jobs market has tripled since 2021. PwC has been clear that Scotland’s strong skills base is a critical factor in attracting green investment and the creation of green jobs.
Institutions such as colleges have a critical role in developing the multiskilled workforce that will drive the just transition to net zero. Last week, my colleague the Acting Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy visited the North East Scotland College campus in Fraserburgh to discuss its curriculum and to launch its Ocean Winds pre-apprenticeship scheme, which is an initiative that supports students who are preparing to work in the offshore wind industry.
Due to the uncertainty over which heating technologies will prevail in the decarbonisation process, colleges, employers and the private sector say that there is a reluctance to invest in large-scale training for young people in new skills such as the installation and maintenance of heat pumps. Has the Government explored the possibility of redirecting ScotWind moneys towards decarbonising the public estate rather than committing them to the crowded renewables investment market? That would surely create the surety of demand to pump prime skills and college places for those who would be needed in a large-scale roll-out of renewable heating in Scotland.
I will attempt to react to some of that and not to the pun about pump priming.
I have recently visited a number of colleges where it has been very clear that there is a commitment in the further education system to introduce young people to all manner of technologies. The member rightly mentions the importance of having a broad spectrum of technologies available, including technologies for older types of heating systems, heat pumps and, perhaps for the future, other means of electric heating for existing radiator systems in houses.
The minister will be aware that one of the key risks that we face in achieving our net zero targets relates to access to the right skills to support the roll-out of the renewable technologies that are required to decarbonise our energy system, whether that is offshore or onshore wind, marine and tidal energy generation or the new age of pumped storage hydro power, which is coming as a result of the planned introduction next year of a cap and floor system for pump storage. Given the critical skills that are needed to achieve net zero, can we do more to ensure that the needs of industry and colleges are effectively aligned to ensure that we are generating the workforce that will be necessary to deliver these technologies in the years ahead?
The member raises important points. We are working to ensure that we have the workforce that we need for the future. The PwC green jobs barometer has been clear that Scotland’s skills base is providing a clear advantage to Scotland, capitalising on green jobs and green skills and identifying applicable skills in other sectors for people who wish to transfer into a new career.
Onshore Wind Farm Planning Consents (Highlands and Islands)
To ask the Scottish Government how many planning consents for onshore wind farm developments in the Highlands and Islands region the Scottish ministers have approved following an appeal since 2021. (S6O-04116)
Since 1 January 2021, a total of nine planning appeals for onshore wind farm developments in the Highlands and Islands region have been allowed.
Clachaig Glen wind farm on the Mull of Kintyre was recently approved by ministers despite huge opposition and concern from local people. One of those campaigners told me that
“the whole focus is on policy and net zero. It is completely lacking in humanity. The SNP talk about empowerment but it is obviously just theirs.”
Many campaigners are not against harnessing wind power, but the sheer volume of applications, especially in the Highlands and Islands, is changing rural communities. Does the minister agree that local people’s views are being ignored? What can he do to improve the situation?
I do not accept the premise of the question, which is that the process ignores people’s views. However, as I have mentioned, the Government is continually seeking to improve the process. That is why we are working with the United Kingdom Government to include things such as pre-consultation for major applications to ensure that those views are taken into account at the earliest possible stage.
Can the minister outline the increase in Scotland’s renewable energy generation capacity as a result of developments such as onshore and offshore wind and solar energy?
As of June 2024, there was 15.6GW of renewable electricity capacity in Scotland. In the past 12 months, renewable electricity capacity has risen, and it is up 5 per cent since June 2023. That is largely due to increases in onshore and offshore wind capacity.
Active Travel Funding
To ask the Scottish Government what recent assessment it has made of the effectiveness of its funding for active travel. (S6O-04117)
All active travel programmes are assessed against criteria set out in the active travel framework, which establishes high-level outcomes and key indicators to monitor and evaluate progress. Data and analysis that inform progress against those outcomes are measured and published annually. In addition, the national performance framework includes journeys by active travel as a national indicator and it is routinely monitored and assessed.
In addition, relevant partners publish annual assessments of their programmes. Those include the national cycle network and places for everyone programmes that are delivered by Sustrans, and the Ian Findlay path fund programme that is delivered by Paths for All.
It is Sustrans that I would like to refer to in my next question. It reports that, in 2024, it received £97.9 million from the Scottish Government and, in the same period, gave out £81 million in grants to Scotland.
Sustrans takes money that should be sent directly to local authorities, and it top slices £17 million of it to pay for its organisation’s overhead. It is based in Bristol and it has no fewer than 13 directors on its board. Why should we not give that money directly to Scotland’s local authorities and leave Sustrans to market itself to them, as any other consultancy does? Would the taxpayer not get better value and more accountability that way?
I question the member’s figures. I can tell him that we have allocated more than £66 million of funding to Sustrans this financial year. That funding supports local authorities and others in Scotland to deliver the infrastructure that is required, including the expansion of the national cycle network, which I am sure that Mr Kerr would want to support. That is managed by its Scotland-based staff.
To bring the member up to date, as part of the transformation of active travel delivery, the funding of the main Transport Scotland infrastructure programme, places for everyone, which is managed by Sustrans, will wind down by December 2025. Any remaining projects will, subject to assessment, shift to the new active travel infrastructure fund, which will see Transport Scotland directly award funding to local authorities, regional transport partnerships and national park authorities. I am sure that the member will welcome that answer.
Can the cabinet secretary confirm the extent of the cut to the active travel budget in the 2025-26 proposals? Spokes estimate the cut to be not £20 million but in excess of £40 million.
Again, we will lay out the detail of our active and sustainable travel funding as the draft budget progresses through Parliament.
The member will be aware of the emergency measures that took place over the past year. We had a real challenge, particularly following the incoming United Kingdom Government’s July statement. In the end, we allocated £155 million for active travel. In the 2025-26 draft budget, which includes money for a bus infrastructure fund—I point that out in order to highlight that the member’s recent assertions in relation to buses are also incorrect—the total for active travel is £188 million, which she will understand is an increase on last year’s spend.
The national cycle network, which was built and managed by Sustrans Scotland, has been hugely successful, generating 60 million trips every year. It does not just connect places together; it connects people to schools and shops within communities as well. Can the cabinet secretary confirm whether the funding for the national cycle network specifically is going up next year in order to enable Sustrans to deliver the projects to start to close some of the missing links that we see at the moment, such as Comrie to Crieff and Dunkeld? [Interruption.]
Our funding for the national cycle network will continue positively. I will not give the detail at this stage, as we work through the detail of the overall active and sustainable transport plan, but I can say that we are very supportive of the national cycle network. Just last week, I saw the good development work on the national cycle network at Carnoustie. It is a plan, a project and a development that we continue to support.
I ask members on the Conservative benches to treat with respect those who are asking the question, which I am sure that they will do with regard to question 6, which is from Jeremy Balfour.
Regional Transport Partnerships
To ask the Scottish Government how it plans to enhance regional transport partnerships over the coming year. (S6O-04118)
Transport Scotland supports regional transport partnerships and local authorities in their role to strengthen the planning and delivery of regional developments. This year, we are providing funding to regional transport partnerships to help them to develop locally targeted interventions that help to encourage and enable people to walk, wheel and cycle more in their neighbourhoods. They also play a central role in delivering the programme as funding recipients, allowing them to allocate funds to local projects.
Transport Scotland continues to engage with regional transport partnerships, which are all quite different in their requirements, on opportunities to increase accessibility, availability and affordability of public transport.
As Stephen Kerr just pointed out, figures that were revealed to us show that Sustrans received £97.9 million from the Scottish Government. That is at a time when the City of Edinburgh Council cannot deal with the potholes in our city. Does the cabinet secretary believe that it would be more effective to give the money to the City of Edinburgh Council to fix the potholes, rather than wasting money on an unelected body?
The original question was about regional transport partnerships, not the City of Edinburgh Council specifically. Councils have responsibility, with funding coming from the Scottish Government, and councils make their decisions about what they fund locally.
Our funding for transport has gone up. For the first time ever, it will be more than £4 billion, and more than £1 billion of that will be in our trunk road developments. As for our funding and support, we will ensure that the regional transport partnerships—which, as the member will be aware, consist of a board comprising a number of different councils tasked with taking regional approaches—will continue to be supported.
A77 Closures
To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the request from the A77 action group for the establishment of a task force to consider issues relating to the impact of the reported increased use of full road closures on the A77. (S6O-04119)
The Scottish Government is committed to on-going engagement with interested parties on strategic transport matters affecting the A77. Transport Scotland has developed a long-standing relationship with the A77 campaign, and there are regular meetings, the last one being on 5 December. I had productive discussions with the group last month and heard directly about the impacts that closures have on road users and local communities. I have agreed to bring together interested stakeholders and the A77 group at a round-table meeting to collectively scope and work through the variety of issues that have been identified and recommended. That will be a better way to achieve progress.
The cabinet secretary will know from her meeting with the A77 action group that the neglect of that trunk road has reduced parts of it to one lane for 3,000 out of 3,652 days since 2014. That is because of a lack of investment. There is an increasing number of evening road closures, which send road users on detours of hours and hundreds of miles, but there are still no plans for any improvements to the road.
It has been some weeks since the cabinet secretary met the action group, so when will those round-table discussions take place? Will she ensure that those discussions become a permanent task force, so that the issues can be discussed regularly?
I met the group last month, and we are making arrangements as to when we will have the round-table meeting. That will allow us to scope out what the issues are. There are a number of issues to consider, particularly the concern about Carlock wall, which has been a great player in affecting the number of days of closure. The closure there has been in place since 2020. I understand that there is a programme completion date of mid-December 2024, which is fast approaching. Work is being carried out to deliver that, at which time temporary traffic lights will move there. That is a challenge geotechnically and topographically, as everybody who knows the area will know.
There are other road closures and diversions. There is a multilayered area of attack that we need to work through, and I think that that will be best scoped out through meetings with the action group. I encourage all partners to come to the table to systematically address the different issues.
It is welcome to hear the update that the cabinet secretary is working really well with the A77 action group. Will she clarify that, although overnight closures of the roads are extremely frustrating, they are necessary to ensure the maintenance of critical infrastructure routes such as the A77? Will she highlight how the A77 has been improved in recent years as a result of action taken by the Scottish National Party?
The majority of works on the A77 trunk road can be carried out safely without the need for full closure, but, when the road has to be closed, there must be engagement with local communities and the travelling public.
Even in the past financial year, £9.4 million has been spent on improving the road. We have invested £134 million since 2007, and there is also the £29 million Maybole bypass. There is investment in the road, but things are problematic because of landslips and other challenges. That is why we need to systematically work through the improvements that can be made.
I and other members from across the chamber have spoken about the need for urgent investment in the A77 during all the time that I have been in the Parliament, and we have waited with bated breath for actual action on strategic transport projects review 2.
The cabinet secretary mentioned the Maybole bypass, for which there was £30 million of investment. If the cabinet secretary ever wanted evidence, I would mention that Maybole has now managed to leverage £100 million of investment because of the bypass. Is that not evidence enough that an awful lot more work on the A77 would improve the lives of people all the way down to Stranraer?
I am glad that the member supports the SNP Government’s delivery of the Maybole bypass. I am from Ayrshire, so I know how important it is and the benefits that it can bring for businesses. The bypass was planned for and delivered.
There is continuing investment in the A77. We hear complaints about closures because of the investments that are being made. You cannot have it both ways—you cannot complain that there is no investment and then complain when works are required for maintenance and because of issues such as landslips. We have invested more than £134 million in the road. Can more be done? Yes. Are we going to systematically work through the issues on the A77? Yes, and I look forward to meeting the A77 group again.
Members should always speak through the chair.
Bus Industry (Zero-emission Technologies)
To ask the Scottish Government how it supports the bus industry to transfer to zero-emission technologies. (S6O-04120)
Since 2020, the Scottish Government has provided more than £150 million to decarbonise the bus sector. More than 800 zero-emission buses and coaches and their charging infrastructure have been supported. The funding includes £41 million in the most recent round of the Scottish zero-emission bus challenge fund, which draws in more than three times as much in private sector investment. The project will support more than 250 new zero-emission vehicles and the installation of 200 chargers across 20 depots, and it will establish the backbone of a pan-Scotland charging network that will be available to other large road vehicles. Since 2018, our bus emissions abatement retrofit scheme has awarded £24 million to retrofit more than 1,200 buses and coaches to support the bus industry in adapting to low-emission zones.
With electrification of the bus industry, how will that funding help to create a whole-Scotland network for buses, coaches and heavy goods vehicles?
As I set out in my original answer, our significant investment in charging infrastructure through ScotZEB 2 is providing electrified depots that can be used by other businesses across the country, where it is possible to do so. Opening the depots to other road users such as heavy goods vehicles can create beneficial new revenue streams for their owners and, at the same time, provide confidence to other fleets that charging can be made available to support operations that are making a transition to zero-emission alternatives. I hope to see even more shared charging infrastructure in the future.
I am sure that the cabinet secretary will agree that Alexander Dennis in Falkirk is one of the jewels in the crown of Scottish manufacturing, but it has cited increasingly unfair competition and subsidies from overseas manufacturers, such as those in China, as being responsible for its recent difficult decision to consult on 160 redundancies at its site in Falkirk. It has said that, of the 252 buses that are expected to be delivered through the Scottish Government zero-emission bus challenge fund, 80 per cent will likely be manufactured outside of the United Kingdom. Will the cabinet secretary agree to engage with Falkirk’s MP, Euan Stainbank, and the Secretary of State for Business and Trade to resolve the issue with unfair procurement practices and ensure that more buses are built in Scotland?
I am disappointed to hear about the redundancies, because the Scottish Government has supported Alexander Dennis through our zero-emission fund. Alexander Dennis has secured orders for more than 360 buses, which is more vehicles than any other manufacturer has secured through our Scottish ultra-low-emission bus scheme and ScotZEB. As the member might be aware, Alexander Dennis might not currently manufacture the type of vehicles that are required, which is why it is important to support the company in developing for future markets.
The member’s point about the new UK Government is really important, because there are questions about its support for zero-emission buses and the potential orders that Alexander Dennis could get from its supporting scheme. He made a point about subsidy control, and we regularly engage with the UK Government on that issue.
I apologise to members whom I was unable to call, but that concludes portfolio questions on net zero and energy, and transport.
There will be a short pause before we move to the next item of business to allow front-bench teams to change positions.
Air ais
Kingdom Off Road Motorcycle ClubAir adhart
Healthcare in Remote and Rural Areas