Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you.

I had hoped to ask Malini Mehra about multilateralism. I understand that she might be back with us, but I will ask Jim Skea some questions first.

What does multilateralism mean in relation to mitigation work? In the workshops in which you were involved, were concerning or helpful geopolitical alignments taking place? On multilateralism, we have discussed the rules on private finance in relation to offsetting. How do we ensure that there is transparency and accountability so that there is real offsetting as opposed to a greenwashing presentation? What is your perspective on multilateralism within companies, not just within the governmental arena?

That is fine. I was trying to make sure that we had a link to that agenda.

First, I thank Malini Mehra for her work at the GLOBE International parliamentary event. I was there throughout the two days, and it was extremely useful. I am interested in your take on the geopolitics of what has happened and what that means for COP27. You said that multilateralism was effective during COP26, but there were also side deals on certain subjects and between different Governments. For example, the premier of China met the US President in recent days. I am interested in your views on the arrangement between India and China, and on the EU’s perhaps lack of presence in relation to some issues.

I am interested in Professor Skea’s points about the Paris agreement and the technical aspects of the rulebook being finally established and set, and what that might mean. That area probably got less coverage compared to the coverage of the outputs in the last few days. Thank you for sharing your reflections on that so quickly after the COP. Will you unpack a bit more what you think the implications of that will be?

We can hear you, and what you are saying is extremely interesting.

I want to ask about the international competitiveness of our systems with regard to our ability to do that. Clearly, businesses have been trading through the pandemic period. We have heard that by working sector by sector we could take everybody along at the same time. However, clearly, we are also in competition internationally. Could Fraser Sime comment on the international competitiveness of funding of SMEs? Are Scotland and the UK competitive with regard to the direction that we are going in on net zero?

I also have a question for Simon Crichton and David Ovens. I am interested in the strength of Scotland’s asset management potential for green investment. Where is the competitive edge that we could have, and will we get enough from COP26 in respect of global financial regulations to allow us to make the most of the opportunities here and to increase the speed of transition?

I am thinking more about the financial situation, the financial opportunities and what banks and asset managers can do. How is Scotland placed in that respect? What potential do we have to be extremely competitive and what is holding us back? I would like Simon Crichton to answer, then David Ovens.

There is global self-interest, and the market situation will drive the adoption of net zero measures by many companies, but we also need other carrots and sticks. Should net zero be incorporated into UK financial regulations? If so, what form could that take? Do you have any views on tax or other financial incentives that might assist?

Could Simon Crichton speak about the wider international perspective?

Jonathan, I would like you to think about the strategic space and about the timescale. You said that the world has to move further and faster, but that is not always going to be driven by the market—clearly, legislation and regulation can drive it. If we are going to make that shift, what do you see as a reasonable timeframe within which to meet the UK targets on climate change and to make the shift from carbon to renewables? What is your strategic thinking on that?