Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you for the question. I will take the last bit first; my colleagues might want to add to my response.

I would expect the questions that you have asked to inform some of the baseline economic analysis that we are doing as part of phase 1 of the just transition plan. What is the lay of the land?

On your wider question about the availability of capital and investment, I suppose that, globally speaking, we recently had the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s sixth assessment report and, among all its dire warnings of climate catastrophe that we are heading for, there was a sort of silver lining with its statement that there is sufficient finance globally to fund the transition. Again, that brings us back to our role, as the Government, of making it very clear that this is the way in which Scotland’s economy and society are going and that we are open to investment of the right kind.

I am conscious that you asked for short answers, convener, but I wonder whether Liam Middleton has anything to add about investment in Scotland. I know that he already works closely with some of the investment bodies.

I will come back to that point—I am writing it down so that I do not forget.

I am committed to co-design. As I said, the energy strategy was developed before my time in the portfolio, but we have a new memorandum of understanding in place between us and the just transition commission, which everyone has welcomed. It speaks to the need for close engagement and early sight of drafts. That is how I expect the plans to be developed.

It is of benefit to us to engage closely with the just transition commission, which has been set up because it brings knowledge across civic society that will make the plans better and more sustainable in the end. Therefore, early sight of drafts and close engagement are important. Your question is in a similar vein to Mr Beattie’s question about communities. It is important that we are able to demonstrate how we have listened and where changes have been made.

It is me.

First, the extent to which the workforce is made up of permanent and agency workers respectively is important. When I was in Grangemouth last week, we discussed the fact that there are an estimated 2,000 full-time equivalent jobs at the cluster, but that it can employ up to 2,000 more contractors, and up to 7,000 at peak times when there is maintenance work to be done. That complicates the picture and presents a challenge that we must rise to.

Earlier, I mentioned the baseline study that we are doing as part of phase 1, which will map the extent to which the workforce is made up of various elements and will clarify the figures that I have just mentioned. Alongside that, we will do another piece of work, which is currently with the future industry board. Liam Middleton might want to say more about that, but it consists of a skills audit. That involves us working with Skills Development Scotland, via the board, to examine existing skills and consider future needs as we make the decarbonisation journey. Those two pieces of work—looking at where we are now in conjunction with the skills audit—will give us a really good picture to enable us to rise to that challenge. Of course, trade unions will be absolutely critical to that process. I do not want anyone to feel that the transition is being done to them; it must happen with them.

Thank you very much, convener. I am pleased to be here for the first time in front of the committee, in my new role as Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Just Transition.

The Government is committed to realising what we see as an exceptional opportunity to deliver a growing green economy. We set that out as one of the primary missions in our prospectus that was published last week. In my section of that prospectus, I set out my commitment to reducing our carbon emissions with the urgency that the climate emergency demands of us, but also to doing so fairly and in a way that takes people, workers and communities with us.

We welcome the inquiry and its specific focus on Grangemouth and the just transition planning that is going on there. The Grangemouth cluster is of significant industrial importance to Scotland and we see it as integral to our future net zero economy and society.

Scotland’s industrial emissions of CO₂ fell by more than 10 million tonnes between the 1990 baseline and 2020. However, the industrial sector today accounts for more than 20 per cent of Scotland’s total greenhouse gas emissions. That is why, in our programme for government, we announced that work is under way on a dedicated and focused Grangemouth just transition plan.

The plan will be place-based, regional and nuanced. It will be different to the other plans that we are setting out and will chart a vision for the cluster to 2045. I was pleased to be able to visit Grangemouth recently. We may get on to discussing that, because I know that the committee also visited there. We are right at the beginning of the process. The work that you have been doing will be helpful in informing much of what we continue to do as we develop the plan.

I will leave it there and we can move to questions.

I based it on the work that was done to produce our final “Hydrogen Action Plan”, which was published on 14 December 2022. That sets out the Government’s strategic approach and the actions that we think are required to harness our capacity to produce hydrogen, to service our domestic needs but, equally, to be an export opportunity for Scotland to service the needs of countries across Europe that must decarbonise their industrial bases and, actually, whose industrial bases are far greater than ours.

As I say, we have the plan, which is backed up by £100 million-worth of investment, which Liam Middleton mentioned earlier. A chapter in the plan is dedicated to how we build the export market for hydrogen, which we know that Scotland can do. I would just add finally that, although we have done all that and we know that the potential is there, a great many of the powers, particularly over the regulatory framework, that are required to really launch Scotland’s hydrogen potential rest at UK level. Therefore, that is another one of my top asks of UK Government.

On the first point, the Grangemouth plan is, by its nature, different from other plans in that it relates closely to one area, one complex and one group of people who live and work there. It is different from the other plans for energy and transport, as they apply to the whole country—it is place based, and the just transition commission has welcomed that.

There are interconnections with other plans, so they will certainly relate to one another. Our economy is interconnected, so we cannot have an energy plan that is not mindful of Grangemouth, and we cannot have a Grangemouth plan that is not mindful of transport, given that 80 per cent of the central belt’s fuel and 100 per cent of our aviation fuel comes from Grangemouth. There are differences and there are interconnections, and we will work through all of them.

I am working closely on monitoring now that I have moved into this portfolio, because the question of building a just transition is one thing, but the question of how we know whether we have succeeded is another. I am working on the theory of that.

Practically, our plan—Andy McCall might want to say more about this, because he and I were discussing it yesterday—is that we need to do some work on baselining the economic and social position at Grangemouth, and we will develop the vision for 2045. Once those aspects are in place, we will be able to set out key performance indicators against which monitoring can be undertaken.

Monitoring will be part of the process, but we are at a very early stage in the development of that. The two key pieces of work that we are undertaking in phase 1 will inform how we monitor progress.

Yes, I am happy to do so. It is an important question. When I visited the cluster last week, I also met Forth Ports, and issues such as planning, the speed of consent and comparisons with the company’s experience elsewhere were raised with me.

A balance will always have to be struck between speed of consent and any risk of deregulation. We have to get that right. The change that we will see over the next 10 or 20 years puts pressure on us as Government to consider that and how quickly it can work.

On the point about the public sector, I come back to the Grangemouth future industry board and its novel approach to bringing the public sector bodies together. On it, we have the Scottish Government, Falkirk Council, Scottish Enterprise, Transport Scotland, SEPA, Skills Development Scotland and Forth Valley College. Now that we have done that, we will consider bringing industry in. We can already see how, with an issue such as planning, that group, which brings the Scottish Government and Falkirk Council round the table, will help us—and has already helped us—shortcut some of the issues that arise when we all have different responsibilities.

The second point on planning that I will briefly mention is the national planning framework 4. I think that the Grangemouth future industry board worked on and was successful in achieving the recognition of Grangemouth as an industrial green transition zone, and with its being in NPF4—and with NPF4 being made part of the development plan—that should give the certainty and the speed of consent that industry not only wants but needs if we are to make the change that we need to over the next wee while.

No, I do not think that it is. First, the industry board has given evidence in writing to the committee. My colleague Andy Hogg, who is a deputy director in the Scottish Government, is one of the co-chairs; he really wanted to be here today, which is why we asked whether we could change the timing, but that was not possible. However, my colleague Liam Middleton is also part of the board, so he will probably be able to say more about its constitution and who its spokesperson is. I am more concerned with the work that it is doing rather than who the spokespeople are.

I am happy to answer that in the context of the discussion that I had with Grangemouth about its sustainability plan. However, I must caveat that by saying that I am not the cabinet secretary for energy, which means that I am not involved on a day-to-day basis on, for example, the development of hydrogen policy, CCUS or sustainable aviation fuel. My role in Government will be to ensure that the energy secretary has those discussions and is supported to do so.

As far as I can tell, there are three ways in which industry can decarbonise and rise to the net zero challenge: by making its industrial processes more efficient; by switching to low-carbon fuels; and by capturing carbon, which we have discussed. When I met Ineos, it took me through its sustainability plan, which is linked to the Government’s 2045 target, and we talked about the company’s £350 million investment in more efficient energy plants at the centre of the complex, a £500 million upgrade to the Forties pipeline system, its plans for CCUS and its interest in sustainable fuels.

However, as far as my understanding of the production of SAF from an engineering or technical point of view is concerned, I will leave it there. Given Liam Middleton’s role in critical infrastructure, he might have more to add to that.