The next item of business is a statement by Gillian Martin on greenhouse gas emissions in 2021 and 2022. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.
14:29
Tackling the climate emergency has been a long-standing commitment of the Government. We were one of the first nations in the world to declare a global climate emergency, and we are already more than halfway to net zero. I am proud to say that, in Scotland, nearly half of the population can now benefit from free bus travel, we provide grants and loans to support households and businesses to move to clean heating, and we have ensured that the public electric vehicle charging network is on track to include 6,000 charging points in 2024, two years ahead of schedule.
Recently, the Met Office confirmed that 2023 was the hottest year on record. Against a backdrop of ever-increasing global temperatures and more extreme weather here, the twin crises of climate change and biodiversity loss are perhaps the single greatest long-term threat that we face globally. It is that threat, the effects of which we are already seeing, that makes action on the climate emergency an urgent moral and environmental imperative.
In line with the requirement under section 36 of the Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009, we laid in Parliament on 5 September an emissions reduction catch-up report for the 2021 and 2022 annual targets. The report sets out the additional emissions reductions that are required to reach the annual targets, which were, regrettably, missed in 2021 and 2022. I am thankful for the opportunity, in a busy schedule of business, to discuss in the Parliament the details of the report.
Earlier this week, I informed the Parliament of two numerical errors that have come to light following the publication of our section 36 report. Those errors pertain to the climate change targets and a recent statement that was made about peatland restoration. The errors do not affect the primary purpose and effect of the section 36 report, as the policy measures that are identified in the report are more than enough to make up for the excess emissions.
The two numerical errors came to light following the publication of our section 36 report. They are relatively limited, but any error of that nature requires immediate and emphatic corrective action. I assure members that I take the importance of providing accurate and clear information to the Parliament very seriously, and I am therefore taking the opportunity to address the matter in the chamber. I wrote to the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee on Monday evening and had a short discussion on the issue during my committee appearance on Tuesday.
The first issue relates to the climate change targets for 2021 to 2029, as published on the Scottish Government website. On the basis of advice from the Climate Change Committee in December 2022, those targets were revised and republished. However, in reviewing the methodology for calculating annual targets as part of the preparation for the passage of the Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill, my officials have determined that there are minor discrepancies of 0.1 percentage points for selected targets between 2021 and 2029, including the target for 2021. That took place in the context of a revision of targets, at the recommendation of the Climate Change Committee, to take account of methodology changes in how greenhouse gas emissions were being measured.
That error has an impact on the section 36 report, which I am here to discuss. We reported that the greenhouse gas account reduced by 49.9 per cent between the baseline period and 2021 and that, as a result, the target of a 51.1 per cent reduction was missed.
On recalculation, I confirm that the correct target figure in 2021 is 51.2 per cent. That small miscalculation has not altered the fact that we missed the 2021 target; it has altered only the scale by which we missed it. The level of resultant catch-up duty has increased by a very small amount: less than 0.1 megatonnes. I confirm that the policy measures that were identified in the published section 36 report are more than enough to make up for that addition.
If the Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill is passed as introduced, that error should only be a backward-looking issue for 2021, rather than a forward-looking issue for performance against current and future targets.
Separately, I must inform members that an error has been identified in the reporting of a peatland restoration statistic relating to the 19 June 2024 statement to the Parliament on Scotland’s performance against the greenhouse gas emissions target. The error was repeated in the 5 September publication of the section 36 report. We stated that we have restored 75,000 hectares of degraded peatland since 2019, which is incorrect. The 75,000 hectares figure reflects the total amount of peatland that has been restored to date, not since 2019.
I have notified the Parliament by letter of those small errors, and I will ensure that the necessary corrections are made to the impacted publications.
We have now reviewed all the policies and actions that we have taken since the publication of the climate change plan update in December 2020. The section 36 catch-up report included the regulation of fluorinated gases—F-gases—and the emissions trading scheme. Those are additional to what was included in estimates of the emissions reductions covered by the climate change plan update. They involve co-ordination with the United Kingdom and Welsh Governments, as well as with the Northern Ireland Executive, to support emissions reductions in Scotland, as well as in the rest of the UK. F-gases are up to 20,000 times more powerful than carbon dioxide. They contribute to climate change and are used in settings such as refrigeration, air conditioning, heat pumps and energy networks. The UK ETS is a carbon-pricing instrument that imposes a cost on emissions from certain sectors.
The report also includes an ambitious package of new policies to step up action on climate change in Scotland and support a just transition to net zero. The policy package contains 19 policy actions, including more than quadrupling the number of electric vehicle charge points by 2030, developing an integrated ticketing system that can be used across public transport, and piloting the roll-out of methane-suppressing animal feed products.
The policies in the report are being progressed in parallel with our ambitious and wide-ranging programme of legislative reform through the Circular Economy (Scotland) Act 2024, the Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Act 2024 and the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill. We also continue to consider next steps with our proposed heat in buildings bill, following recent consultation.
In addition, this year, we will set out a route map for the delivery of approximately 24,000 additional public electric vehicle charge points by 2030. We will progress our ambition of a 20 per cent reduction in car use by 2030, and we will support farmers and crofters to reduce emissions and deliver biodiversity improvements through our agricultural reform programme. However, despite committing £4.7 billion in 2024-25 for activities that will have a positive impact on the delivery of our climate change goals, the almost 9 per cent cut to our capital budget by 2027-28 from the UK Government—a cumulative loss of more than £1.3 billion—has added to the already very challenging fiscal environment. We are also concerned that the £22 billion-worth of cuts that were recently announced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer could have a further negative impact on delivery.
We have introduced legislation to enable a carbon budget approach to be taken to emissions targets. Replacing linear annual targets with five-year carbon budgets will provide a more reliable framework for sustained progress on reducing emissions. We are retaining our ambitious commitment to reach net zero by 2045, alongside annual reporting on our climate progress, and we will continue to publish catch-up reports for any missed targets. Scottish ministers have an unwavering commitment to a just transition to net zero by 2045—five years ahead of the UK as a whole—which is still one of the most ambitious targets in the world.
I look forward to working with members on this vital issue and to the Parliament’s consideration of the Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill.
The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues raised in her statement. I intend to allow about 20 minutes for questions, after which we will move on to the next item of business.
I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement, but that statement by the devolved Scottish National Party Government is an embarrassment. The Government constantly misses its climate change targets and now has to admit that it cannot even do its sums properly, which smacks of complete incompetence. Targets have been missed, calculations are wrong, the section 36 report is inaccurate and the peatland restoration figures are wrong. We were promised a climate change plan months ago but have no guarantee that we will see a draft by next summer. We were promised an energy strategy and a just transition plan months ago, but those have still not been published. Targets have been scrapped and there is no real clarity about when the new carbon budgets will be in place.
When it comes to climate change, the SNP has overpromised and underdelivered. It has simply lost all credibility. What will the devolved Government do to regain the people’s trust? Can the cabinet secretary guarantee that there will be a climate change plan in law before the end of this parliamentary session? What steps will the Government take to ensure that the data that is published is accurate?
It is regrettable when we miss targets, but I still think that we should set stretching targets. I also think it is important that we have the mechanism of a section 36 report, so that we can take corrective action when we do not meet such targets.
The report that I published includes a suite of new policies, including more than quadrupling the number of electric vehicles, that will step up action in Scotland on climate change. We are also working with the UK Government on fluorinated gases and on the UK emissions trading scheme.
One of my predecessors, Roseanna Cunningham, said that when we set stretching targets, we must be prepared to follow them up with action. When we bring measures to Parliament to accelerate that action, we should expect that those who are critical, like Mr Lumsden, will vote for them in order to meet the targets. In the spirit of what Mr Lumsden asked, I therefore look forward to having the full support of Conservative members for the measures that we propose to make up for missing the targets, because action is required in those areas.
Mr Lumsden mentioned statistical errors. My statement included an assessment of how those small errors were made. Action to correct those errors was taken within a matter of hours of the officials noticing them. We are talking about a difference of 0.1 percentage points between figures, and that has been corrected. I wrote to the committee as soon as I found out about the error and discussed it as part of my evidence on Tuesday, and I am making the point here today. If Mr Lumsden wants more detail, I would be happy to write to him.
I also thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement and welcome her commitment to transparency, although the adjusted numbers still represent missed targets and missed opportunities.
The cabinet secretary talked about 19 Scottish Government policies, most of which are not new and all of which lack detail. She mentioned the idea of integrated ticketing, which goes back to 2012, but the only commitment in the policy package is to explore that idea. A reduction in car use was also included but, in March, the UK Climate Change Committee said that any clear strategy for how that will be achieved is missing. The cabinet secretary referred to bus passes for the over-60s, which I introduced, and for the under-22s, which I welcomed, but we are losing buses, train services are being cut and peak fares are coming back at the end of the month.
Almost all 19 policies are just warm words. The current approach is failing, so will the cabinet secretary outline the actions that the Government is taking to tackle the highest-emitting sectors such as transport, buildings, land use and industry? Will she also set out what sectoral reductions the Government will actually deliver to reduce our emissions?
The report includes a range of actions, and a range of ways of delivering emissions reductions was set out in the programme for government.
I will point to some of what is in the plan. Some ideas are long-term and we will build on or develop them. There is a consultation at the moment about the management of marine protected areas. We have a biodiversity delivery plan, and the coming land reform will include actions to reduce emissions. We will use a hydrogen action plan to decarbonise our industries.
We have strategic investment in offshore wind, which will decarbonise our electricity supply. We will have a natural environment bill, which is designed to improve biodiversity, and a heat in buildings bill, which is designed to bring down the emissions from both our domestic and commercial building networks. We are implementing an agricultural reform programme as part of the Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Act 2024, the bill having been passed before the summer recess. We are committed to a 20 per cent reduction in car use and, as we committed to in April, we are consulting on a carbon tax.
The actions that we have included in the report should result in a reduction of 4.1 megatonnes in greenhouse gas emissions, which will more than compensate for the shortfall in 2021-22. Factors from before that point made a material impact: there was an increase in car use and, indeed, in aviation use as a result of restrictions being lifted after Covid-19, which meant that there was a spike. That is why the five-year carbon budgeting approach will look at things beyond the in-year process, where we have spikes and troughs.
I assure Sarah Boyack that I am doing everything I can with the budget that I have available to me and that the cabinet secretaries are helping me to reduce emissions in their sectors in order to ensure that we look strategically at where we can take direct action. A lot of that will be informed by the cross-Government work that we do where there are reserved issues, such as with regard to the gas grid. I will continue that very challenging work with the budget that I have, and I am happy to take any advice from anyone who has solutions to any of the challenges that we face.
I advise members that we have used up about seven minutes and a number of back benchers are keen to answer questions, so brief questions and brief answers would be appreciated.
It is vital to ensure that Scotland’s pathway to 2045 is set at a realistic pace and scale that are feasible and reflect the latest independent advice. Will the cabinet secretary say more about the Government’s plans to engage with stakeholders and experts such as the Climate Change Committee as the pathway unfolds?
We intend to engage more widely during the development of the secondary legislation in order to set carbon budget levels in developing the next climate change plan. That will include requesting formal advice from the Climate Change Committee and continued engagement with groups such as the climate change plan advisory group.
The time period for parliamentary scrutiny of the next climate change plan remains unchanged. It will still be a minimum of 120 days. I set my ambition in committee earlier this week: if we get our advice from the CCC in early spring, I hope that I will be able to put a draft climate change plan in front of the committee and our wider stakeholders before the summer recess. However, our public engagement strategy sets out our vision for all of Scotland to understand the challenges that we face and to embrace their role in our transition to net zero.
The cabinet secretary mentioned integrated smart ticketing, which was first promised in 2012. Given that the technology exists to set that up and it is being used across Europe, when does she expect to see such a system here in Scotland?
I look forward to seeing an integrated ticketing system as swiftly as possible, but I do not lead on that particular policy area—Fiona Hyslop does that. I will get Ms Hyslop to write to Graham Simpson with an exact indication of when she sees that happening.
We still have the 2045 target, and we want to increase public transport use as much as possible and have a viable alternative to people using their cars. Of course, that is not the only solution. We are also encouraging people, when they buy a car, to choose an electric vehicle, and we are well ahead of target in delivering the promised number of EV charging places.
We have to make sure that there is not a one-size-fits-all approach to transport, because there are rural areas where people require to use their cars more often than they might use buses or trains. We are taking a strategic approach. The specific question that Graham Simpson asked about the delivery of an integrated ticketing system is a question for Fiona Hyslop, and I will make sure that she responds to him.
The cabinet secretary will recognise that peatlands have an important part to play in supporting us in reaching our climate targets and reducing our emissions. However, three quarters of the almost 2 million hectares of peatlands that we have in Scotland are degraded at present. What specific action has been taken to prevent any further degradation of our peatlands? In addition, given that one of the biggest challenges that we face in the repair of our peatlands is access to the right skill sets to carry out that work, what work has been taken forward to make sure that we bridge that skills gap, in order to speed up the process of repair?
Michael Matheson will be familiar with the Scottish Government’s commitment to deploying £250 million over 10 years to bring peatlands back from degradation, as they are an important carbon sink. He made a very good point that delivering on that is about not just money but the capacity of the skilled workforce.
There are a couple of areas to note. I mentioned the provisions in the Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Act 2024, which will be rolled out to encourage land managers to restore peatland in their areas. To help them in that, the NatureScot-led peatland skills action plan will focus on increasing the workforce capacity for the design of restoration schemes, and growth in the contracting sector to deliver on future restoration targets.
There is a strong focus on increasing the available workforce. The Crichton Carbon Centre-led training events and open days have been attended by nearly 450 people so far this year. Many of the attendees at the training events were contractors looking to enter the sector by enhancing their skills. That is only one tranche of the work that is happening. I am very aware that we have to shout from the rooftops that we need to restore peatland as quickly as possible, provide the space for contractors to bid for work, and ensure that people who want to enter the sector know that they have a viable career opportunity and give them the support that they deserve.
Cabinet secretary, we need more succinct answers. I appreciate that detail is key, but we must try to allow as many members as possible to ask questions.
Agriculture is one of the most important areas that needs clear guidance on practical ways to reduce emissions. The rural support plan has still not been published. What specific outcome-based measures will be in the plan for farmers and crofters to target emissions, given the heavy lifting that the industry will have to do to meet the climate change ambitions?
Mairi Gougeon is working on the deployment of all the measures that were included in the Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Act 2024, which is part of the work that Rhoda Grant referenced.
Ms Grant mentioned heavy lifting, but there also needs to be a recognition of the work that has already been done in the agriculture sector to improve biodiversity and sequester carbon. That has not been recognised in the support system that we have at the moment. There will be a recognition of the work that happens, but there will also be an incentivisation, through support payments, for more work to happen, so that, for example, when farmers and land managers plant in a particular way that is better for biodiversity, or when they decide to rewet a peatland that is in their area, they will be rewarded.
As I said to other members about work in other cabinet secretaries’ areas, I am happy to let Ms Gougeon know that Rhoda Grant has asked that question, as she may be able to provide more detail.
The Scottish Government has proposed the adoption of new carbon budgets to measure progress towards emissions reduction targets alongside the rest of the UK and, I understand, international counterparts such as France and Japan. Will the cabinet secretary say a bit more about the lessons that have been learned from the use of the carbon budgeting systems in those countries and how they have informed the Scottish Government’s approach to the issue?
Carbon budgets are an established model of emissions reduction in a number of countries. We have learned from our own experience that emissions reduction does not happen in a straight-line trajectory. I mentioned in my answer to Sarah Boyack that there are peaks and troughs.
A carbon budgeting system has been used by the UK, the Welsh Government, the Northern Ireland Executive and countries in the European Union. Using such a system means that we will be able to look at a five-year period, but I add that we will always report yearly on our movement towards the ambitions set within those five-year budget envelopes. It is an established model that is used in a great number of countries and one that the CCC has asked us to adopt, too.
The only aspect of the report that is a new one on me is not even a change in Scottish Government policy or action; it is a highly technical series of consultations on the ETS, which were conducted using a four-nations approach. Most of the report simply restates existing policy, or the policy package that was announced back in April—each policy of which, I have to say, was painfully extracted under pressure from the Greens against reluctance from the Scottish National Party. None of that was designed to be the contents of a section 36 report to catch up on 2021 and 2022. Why does the report contain no new policy or action beyond what we all already knew about?
The report is designed to set out a suite of policies that will make up for the shortfall in 2021 and 2022, and it more than does that. The objective of the legislation is that when organisations have to report on their missed targets, they put plans in place. The plans in this report will more than compensate for the missed targets and will go much further, too. We have to consider what we can do and where we can take the most action within the financial envelope that we have. As I am sure that Mr Harvie will understand from his time in government, it will not be easy to deliver on new policies on top of the ones to which we have already committed. The actions that we have set out in the report are sufficient to make up for the shortfall.
The full delivery of Scotland’s ambitious net zero agenda is compromised by the UK Government’s huge 9 per cent cut to Scotland’s capital budget. Therefore, it is vital that we continue to urge the UK Government to take climate change seriously and to meet the significant up-front costs that are required to deliver a net zero economy. Will the cabinet secretary say a little more about the Scottish Government’s latest engagement with the UK Government in that regard? I hope that it has been constructive.
The First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government have met the Chancellor of the Exchequer several times. They highlighted the expected real-terms cut to our capital funding, which is severely impacting our ability to progress vital infrastructure projects, not least those for achieving our net zero ambitions.
I have already been engaging with my counterparts in the UK Government on their net zero ambitions. I am keen to work with the UK Government to ensure that the 30 October budget provides for us—and, indeed, for my UK counterparts. If the UK will not reach net zero by 2050, Scotland will not reach net zero by 2045, and the reverse is true. We need to ensure that in the future there will be funding behind all those policies if we are to achieve the ambitions that both Governments have set out.
It is vital that the Government is accurate when setting out how it will catch up on missed targets. Unfortunately, the vague list of reviews, consultations and plans set out back in April will be insufficient. As Sarah Boyack pointed out, integrated ticketing, which the Cabinet Secretary for Transport has promised, was first promised by the SNP back in 2012.
Sticking with the subject of transport and actions to persuade people out of their cars, does the cabinet secretary accept that increasing rail travel will be of little use if we are still using old, polluting diesel trains? Can she confirm that the Government is still committed to removing diesel passenger trains from service by 2035?
The Scottish Government is committed to decarbonising its passenger rail network. Details of how that will be achieved will be set out in the rail services decarbonisation action plan, which commits to all passenger diesel trains being replaced. The programme for that, and the order in which things will be done, will depend on business cases and the available budget. However, as I said in response to other members’ questions relating to the transport secretary’s portfolio, I will be happy to ask her to provide Mr McArthur with further details.
This afternoon’s statement has come about because of unforced errors in simple mathematics, so let me see whether I can help the cabinet secretary. She talked about a route map for electric vehicles. That was announced in June 2023, with a target of 6,000 more EVs by 2026, supported by £30 million from the Scottish Government and £30 million from the private sector. Has the cabinet secretary got the £30 million from the private sector yet?
It is fair that we recognise that other portfolio areas are important in getting us to net zero. However, I appear to be being asked particularly intricate questions about the transport portfolio responsibilities of my colleague Fiona Hyslop, although, obviously, I do not have the intricate granular detail on that in front of me. Therefore, I am quite happy to make sure that Ms Hyslop writes to Edward Mountain to provide him with the detail that he needs on that very specific point.
That concludes the statement. I apologise to the two members whom I was unable to call, but, as always, we have come up against the clock, and I need to protect the rest of the business of the afternoon.
Air ais
Portfolio Question TimeAir adhart
Qualifications and Assessment