Seòmar agus comataidhean

Yes, that is absolutely appropriate. While we are in the UK and the UK Government has powers that are so directly in play, including over energy and macroeconomic policy, it has a really important role to play. Our climate targets are interlinked while we are in the UK.

I have not had one yet—I have been in post only a couple of weeks—but I have net zero interministerial Government meetings, and I would expect that to be a forum in which I would raise with my counterparts the issue of this just transition plan and others.

Of course.

Yes, absolutely. That is a really well-made point. I tried to make it earlier when I talked about policy making over the long term.

We need technological advances to assist us over the next 20 or 25 years, and we need the UK Government to make the interventions that it requires to make. The planning that we put in place has to be responsive to that, so I will ensure that, when we present the plan, we are clear about its iterative nature.

Yes, absolutely. That applies in the development of the just transition plan, and the climate change plan, which we are also working on just now and that we hope to present a draft of this year.

We must be able to demonstrate that technological advances will come on stream. We try hard to present that in different ways. If we have certainty about the closure of track 2 and Acorn’s role within it, for example, we will be able to say with a great deal more certainty the role that CCUS will play. If, for example, we are talking about some of the early-stage developments in agriculture for the capture of methane in cattle sheds, we have to indicate how early in its development that is and when we think it might come on stream.

We try to be realistic about the developments that are in play and the timescales at which they might start to reduce Scotland’s emissions and contribute towards the emissions reduction targets.

One of the most important things that we will do to bring all that together will be setting the vision for 2045. It will say to the people who are employed, those who are working or who have investments, with regard to the energy security needs of the country, what the Grangemouth area and the cluster will look like when we hope to reach net zero by 2045. That is not, and could never be, simply about emissions reduction to the exclusion of everything else—it must address what it is like to work and live there, and what needs Grangemouth continues to serve for Scotland.

I come back to the tripartite nature of the issues for Grangemouth: there is its economic importance; its importance to people, such as those who work there or who live in and around it; and its impact on the environment. Those are the three key strands that the vision must cover, and they will be developed hand in hand with people who are affected by it.

At this early stage, that is all that I can say, unless officials would like to add anything. It is about those three key points and developing a vision for how we get there in collaboration with the people who are affected.

That is a really important question. You are quite right: the Scottish Government considers carbon capture and storage to be absolutely vital to our net zero plans. That is backed up by our statutory advisers on climate change, the Climate Change Committee, whose advice is that it is a necessity and not an option. Coupled with that is the fact that Scotland is exceptionally well placed to have carbon capture, utilisation and storage functioning across the country and, in particular, feeding into Acorn at St Fergus.

The UK Government’s decision not to include Acorn in the track 1 process was inexplicable, and my view on that is shared by people across the political spectrum and, importantly, outside it. However, we welcome the UK Government’s confirmation that Acorn will form part of track 2. We are now trying to establish exactly when that process will close so that we can understand and track how and when CCUS, which is such an important component of our net zero planning, can come on stream in Scotland. It is linked with Grangemouth in many ways, because it is a core part of its sustainability plan, too.

That is a really good question. It is exactly as you described. Core responsibility for the development of the policy sits with the cabinet secretary with the portfolio responsibility, so Mairi Gougeon will lead on agriculture and land and Neil Gray will lead on energy. However, in the same way as I have a responsibility to ensure that all my colleagues rise to meet the Government’s climate change targets, I have a responsibility to ensure that the just transition work is being done across Government. It used to be that the holder of the finance portfolio was empowered to go across Government and see what everyone was doing in their portfolios. The net zero and just transition portfolio is like that, too.

I am happy to answer that question, although it somewhat strays out of the remit of this evidence session. I appreciate that, although I am not the energy secretary, I have responsibility across Government for the just transition.

We mentioned that there are about 43 or 44 recommendations in the commission’s response to the plan. We are currently considering them, and I will respond to each of them jointly with Neil Gray, the Cabinet Secretary for Wellbeing Economy, Fair Work and Energy. I acknowledge the themes about monitoring and evaluation, engagement and skills. The Scottish Government will actively consider how we can adapt in response to them.

First, we have the public sector stakeholders who are important to Grangemouth. Many of them are already on the Grangemouth future industry board. Other stakeholders are from the industry, and we might come on to talk about the extent to which they ought to be involved in the future industry board. We then have the workers, their trade unions and the communities around the area. Together with the just transition commission and the Scottish Parliament, I see them as being the key stakeholders.

We will engage with SMEs, but I come back to my initial point that we must be clear that we must start by engaging with the large emitters, because that is where the real challenge lies. However, I expect SMEs to be engaged with as part of the plan because of the supply chain work that we need to do and also because, if they are based in the area, they have a stake in it.

I add that I will be engaging with my colleague Richard Lochhead, who brought much of this work to where it is now and who is now the Minister for Small Business, Trade and Innovation, on what he expects and what he can do to support me in the development of our approach.