Seòmar agus comataidhean

How often do you have meetings?

Yes.

The report talks about the director generals embedding

“climate change considerations into their financial and policy decision-making processes.”

Obviously, the DG for net zero has to work with all the other DGs to ensure that climate change is considered in the activities that they lead on. Mr Brannen, can you tell us about the work that you are undertaking, as the portfolio accountable officer, to ensure that climate change is considered in each of the Government directorates by the other portfolio accountable officers?

I was going to ask whether minutes are taken, but you have answered that. Minutes are now taken of all those meetings. It is important for our scrutiny to know which matters have been raised and to see what action has been taken.

I have some more specific questions on governance and capacity. You have touched on some of the areas in your previous answers, but I will go through them anyway.

I do not underestimate how complex the lines of accountability are, because they cut through different directorates. However, they mean that cross-Government collaboration is required in order to progress climate change policies and manage competing priorities. To what extent is effective cross-Government collaboration taking place to progress climate change actions and management of competing policy priorities?

So there are enough meetings for people to put their points across.

When new developments come out, is that brought up at meetings? I am thinking about heat in buildings, for example. There were reports in the press recently about whether heat pumps are any good in the Scottish climate. Would such issues be brought up at your meetings? Would you discuss whether to progress with, or to do more on, a particular development?

Which specific programmes are likely to experience lower than expected spend or to require extended timeframes to achieve delivery on the scale that was originally anticipated?

The report explains that

“The issuing of a disclaimer on the audit opinion, means that the auditors cannot provide assurance on the use of public money by Scottish Canals during 2021/22.”

As a disclaimer was also issued for the 2020-21 accounts, what are the wider implications of not having assurance on Scottish Canals’ use of public money over the past two years?

I have a quick question about target setting. When you set targets for transport or any kind of infrastructure, who sets the targets and ensures that they are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time bound, rather than being pulled out of thin air? I am looking at some of the figures—for example, it was initially planned that £495 million would be spent on bus priority investment but, so far, only £26 million has been allocated. I know that you say that you are still reviewing things to see where you can make savings.

On housing, there seems to be an 11-year plan to build 110,000 houses by 2032, which works out at about 10,000 houses a year. According to that, it looks as though we are 12,517 short, although I recognise that we have still to get to the end of this financial year. Are there workings in the background that show how many houses you expected to build each year? Is there more information that can be shared so that we know where we are in the investment programme?