Seòmar agus comataidhean

Yes. I remind everyone of my entry in the register of members’ interests, which shows that I was a local councillor at the start of this session of Parliament.

Good morning, cabinet secretary. The plan states that:

“Mandating the reporting of procurement emissions at this time could result in unintended negative consequences and driving the wrong type of behaviour and decision making.”

Can you expand on what you mean by that and some of the “negative” things that could happen?

When you talk about the methodology, are you talking just about local authorities? After all, you have mentioned the supply chain—and rightly so. Surely the people in that need a common methodology, too. As the last panel were saying, you might be judging between two suppliers, and one might say, “I am doing great on my scope 3 emissions”, while the other says, “I am not doing so good.” However, what if they are not being judged in the correct way, and you are making decisions on that basis?

Is there a danger that the methodology might harm the smaller suppliers in the chain?

So, it is a complete mix.

But is it not the case that if you are not measuring something, you cannot improve it?

Clare, would you like to come in?

Mark, do you think that voluntary reporting will make any impact for local authorities?

I think that we need more information. However, could a motion to annul be lodged and then withdrawn, once we hear the evidence?

The Scottish Government’s response says that:

“Mandating the reporting of procurement emissions at this time could, therefore, result in unintended negative consequences and driving the wrong type of behaviour and decision making.”

Do witnesses agree with that comment? I will go to Mark Roberts first.