Seòmar agus comataidhean

That is very reassuring. I hope that I will not have to go through an air-source heat pump process again, but it sounds as though you have looked at the process and have introduced improvements.

Fulton MacGregor joins us online with questions on cost and finance.

I have a few more questions on monitoring. Annex 3 describes monitoring progress against an emissions envelope, supported by early warning indicators. However, effective parliamentary scrutiny, which is what the committee is trying to do, depends on understanding the assumptions that the Government is making. I am interested to know whether it will be possible to see key modelling assumptions for the building sector before the final climate change plan is published, including the assumed installation rates, uptake trajectories and delivery timelines. We have built the plan on certain modelling, and I am also interested to understand how current the datasets that are being used are, so that we can understand whether we are starting from the right place.

10:45

Thanks very much for that. I suggest that you look at the Official Report of the evidence session that we had with COSLA and other local authority-related organisations, which was a very good evidence session. I see nodding heads, so perhaps that has already been referred to.

It may be that something is already in the plan, but there is a point about how we translate that into people saying, “This is really easy to pick up” and “This is my bit and I need to do it”. We heard earlier about the good ideas around consumer engagement and such things. Perhaps there needs to be something for people who are delivering engagement to help them to understand that that is what they need to be doing.

The next item on our agenda is to take evidence on the draft climate change plan from the Cabinet Secretary for Housing. We are joined by the cabinet secretary, Màiri McAllan; Gareth Fenney, the Scottish Government’s interim deputy director for heat in buildings delivery; Henry Hardy, climate change plan team leader; and Jess Niven, interim deputy director for heat in buildings policy and regulation. I welcome you all to the meeting. There is no need for you to operate the microphones, as we will do that for you.

If you wish to make a brief opening statement, cabinet secretary, you are welcome to do so.

Will you clarify what you mean by schemes and provisions that already exist? Do you mean things such as the Home Energy Scotland programmes?

Thanks for that reassurance.

I move to a theme that you have already brought up, cabinet secretary, which is about the dependency on the UK Government’s decisions and managing the risks in that regard. My favourite annex of the plan—annex 3—makes clear that the buildings emissions pathway is highly sensitive to the UK Government’s decisions on electricity pricing and energy market reform, and that much of the post-2030 delivery is uncosted as a result of that unknown. I think that you have already answered this, but I will ask about it again: how dependent is the buildings emissions pathway on UK Government action that is outwith Scotland’s control, and what specific risk management or contingency measures are in place if those decisions are delayed or do not materialise?

Mark Griffin will ask questions about public engagement, advice and funding programmes.

Annex 3 shows that emissions reductions in buildings are largely policy dependent, which is what we have been talking about, although you pointed out that some degree of preparation can be done before we legislate. Delivery costs are shared across the Government, local authorities and households. Something that came up in one of our previous evidence sessions was a sense from stakeholders that there is a plan but they do not understand how it is going to be delivered—there is no clarity on that.

On the building sector, I am interested in knowing whether you would be willing—or able, because we are in a very time-constrained situation—to publish a policy-by-policy delivery table, at least for the carbon budget. I think that there is a route map element, but could you set out the expected emissions impacts, who is delivering it, the start date and the expected funding route? We should have that clarity so that we can take the plan and actually deliver it. In that way, we would have clarity in Parliament and, when we come back to look at the matter in the next parliamentary session, we would have a measurable model of what was committed to and what we have achieved. Is that possible, particularly in relation to carbon budget 1?

Good morning, and welcome to the second meeting in 2026 of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee. I remind all members and witnesses to ensure that their devices are on silent. Fulton MacGregor is joining us online this morning.

The first item on our agenda is to decide whether to take item 3 in private. Do members agree to do so?

Members indicated agreement.

Thanks very much for that opening statement. I will start this morning’s conversation with a number of general questions.

Annex 3 of the draft plan shows that emissions reductions of only around 0.4 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent are expected from residential buildings in the first carbon budget period, with the vast majority of that backloaded into the 2030s. Given that, I would be interested to understand how publishing a new heat in buildings strategy and delivery plan at the end of 2026 can be considered to be aligned with the pace of action that is required now to stay within the first carbon budget, rather than deferring delivery and risk to later periods.