Seòmar agus comataidhean

Yes, I am content to agree to it. We are where we are. However, there is a risk of the regulation having to be brought back again, for the Government to amend the amendment on the basis of there having been another international conversation. It seems like a bit of a waste of time.

I was struck by your initial comments, Richard, about the big challenges in making sure that there is a climate change plan that delivers for Scotland’s potential role under the proposed natural environment bill and around unanswered questions about environmental governance. However, there is a whole range of other issues as well. You mentioned seal scarers in fish farms, and the whole raft of regulatory reform analysis that Environmental Standards Scotland performs.

How challenging is that landscape at the moment? Week in, week out, I come across demands for reform of regulation and questions about enforcement. Most recently, we heard about the treatment of battery waste at recycling centres, which is an issue that raises questions about whether the regulations are adequate.

In a landscape in which there is such a strong demand for ESS’s services, how do you equip the organisation to deal with the breadth of that demand, to analyse whether regulations are being enforced appropriately and to consider whether they are fit for purpose in the first place?

I have a final question. The committee has been looking at the bill for quite some time, during which other legislation has been progressing through Parliament, including the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Act 2024. Is the bill also an opportunity to address some loopholes and issues in other acts that relate to land use? In particular, there are concerns about a loophole in the aforementioned act in relation to the area that is subject to grouse moor licensing. Clearly, some such issues were not foreseen when the bill was drafted. Given that we are in the last year of the parliamentary session, is the cabinet secretary considering whether the bill would be an appropriate vehicle to try and tidy up anything that exists in that space? [Laughter.]

Okay.

I will move on to lotting. I understand the interaction between the two things, but there is a concern that new owners could just combine land that has been lotted under a ministerial decision. Concern was raised around natural capital projects, with major investors perhaps seeing small parcels of land and deciding to buy them. What is your answer to that concern?

Would you say that the resources that you currently have as an organisation are adequate?

Scottish Greens will back the legislative consent motion at decision time, but I want to sound a note of caution, because we have come through a period in which devolution in Scotland and Wales faced unprecedented attacks from the previous Westminster Government. Intergovernmental ways of working in the UK are still largely based on precedent and good will, rather than being codified in legislation as they are in most other countries that have a devolved context. Ways of working that are based on principles of respect, such as the Sewel convention, have been seriously undermined and contested in recent years to a point where they have become almost meaningless.

In the context of the Great British Energy Bill, I welcome the changes that the Scottish Government has secured to embed a more consultative approach between the Administrations, but there is still a danger of overreach from a future Westminster Government. There will be a role for this Parliament to bring transparency to those relationships, and the convener of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee made some important points about the role of the committees in that.

When we reflect on the evidence that the committee received, there is clearly a sense that the Labour Government is working more collaboratively with Scottish ministers, which is very welcome. However, despite all the bluster from Anas Sarwar at First Minister’s question time today, when I asked Michael Shanks at committee about the role of GB Energy in promoting nuclear projects, he sounded pretty reasonable. He said:

“Clearly, we have a political difference on nuclear”.

He went on:

“there are no plans and there will be no engagement on that issue, because it is clear that the Scottish Government would block those applications.

That is the legitimate position that the Scottish Government has taken on that planning matter, and I do not think that there is a confrontation or a conflict on that.”—[Official Report, Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, 21 January 2025; c 53.]

That was real clarity—no new nuclear in Scotland. That is what Labour head office says, and that is probably the best news that Labour back benchers have had all week.

However, Stephen Kerr raised a valid question, because it is still not really clear what GB Energy will do in Scotland, how many jobs it will create and how long it will take to do that. I take on board Sarah Boyack’s point that it is early days, but I note for clarity that there is a huge record of success in the development of renewable energy in Scotland, which is bringing down bills and keeping the lights on across the UK. For example, the onshore wind sector deal, which the Greens were proud to work on with SNP ministers during our time in government, is now starting to help to double the generation capacity from onshore wind in Scotland by 2030. With that will come opportunities for community benefit and community ownership, and that is real energy security.

I am just closing.

I hope that GB Energy will build on the success that we have had in Scotland and grow the economy in the right way to create the green jobs that are needed to meet our energy needs going forward. For those reasons, on balance, we will support the LCM at decision time.

Will the minister give way?

I thank those members who signed my motion to bring the debate to the chamber. I am sure that members will wish to thank the communities that have fought so hard to save our libraries, and to thank librarians for their tireless work.

I was delighted to host library campaigners from across Scotland, and from the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals Scotland, in Parliament today, and we had an insightful discussion with members at lunch time. I welcome those who have joined us in the public gallery, and many more who are watching online.

In recent months, we have seen an outpouring of love for our libraries, which shows how critical they are to the health of our communities, especially in this post-Covid age, when there are real dangers of social isolation and misinformation at large. Seven libraries across Perthshire have been threatened with closure, from Alyth to Auchterarder and Birnam to Comrie, and Scone, and libraries that will remain open are likely to have their hours cut from April this year. Most of those are rural libraries, and once they are gone, they will be gone forever.

Throughout the winter, I have been to some big demonstrations in Perthshire and attended online meetings, at which people have told warm-hearted stories of how important libraries are to them. It is clear that libraries are about so much more than just book borrowing. In Scone, I learned about how vital the library is for older people, enabling them to come together and share memories, especially those who are suffering with dementia. Those reminiscence groups are one of the few places where sufferers can escape the fog of dementia and feel truly heard.

One constituent pointed out that because the local primary school does not have its own dedicated library, the services at Scone library have helped to fill that gap. In Birnam, a father told us how his family have borrowed “hundreds” of books, while a mother told us how visiting the library is a highlight of her daughter’s week and is encouraging a real love of reading in her and all her friends.

Across Scotland, libraries host workshops and activities that benefit the community. There are knitting and toddler groups, and every library in Scotland offers free or low-cost activities such as bookbug, which is designed to support early-years development. Those activities are vital for communities, helping to connect the local community and build support networks for people at all stages of life. Libraries are often the last free, warm facilities that are available in many rural communities. They are genuinely a lifeline.

It is ironic that closures are being proposed to make savings for Perth and Kinross Council when that is clearly a false economy. Perth and Kinross Council spends less than any other council on its library services, despite having the second-highest level of library usage in Scotland. Removing warm, free spaces that combat social isolation will have a negative cost to the council and to health services in the long run. It is no wonder, therefore, that Perthshire’s communities have mobilised against closures, organising petitions and working together. They have a positive vision that is about thriving libraries, not just fighting closures.

Communities have been meeting with Culture Perth and Kinross, which is the arm’s-length company that was set up by the council to run the libraries. CPK is, admittedly, in a difficult position, as years of underfunding from the council have meant that it is now at the point at which it has to either shut services or pass them over to community-led management. However, rural communities in Perthshire are already being asked to take over other services from which the council has retreated, and volunteers can only do so much to backfill cuts.

Community-led management might be an option for some libraries, but negotiation cannot take place under the threat of immediate closures. Negotiation has to be respectful, and the cuts must be taken off the table first. The council is also exploring options such as click-and-collect style services and more mobile libraries, but those should be additional services, not a replacement. Once again, I stress that libraries are not just about borrowing books—they are about so much more than that. Closing local services will also force people to travel further. Should Birnam library close, for example, residents will either need to travel for half an hour to Perth or negotiate a dangerous junction on the A9 to head north to Pitlochry. Both options are costly in time and in money.

The council has options. This year’s budget settlement provides the flexibility to stop the cuts this year. In fact, the council’s finance and resources committee was meeting this afternoon to scrutinise the administration’s draft budget, ahead of a final decision later this month. It looks like communities are finally being heard on the issue, and there is at least a stay of execution that can be agreed. I think that it is fair to say, however, that Perth and Kinross Council has overstretched its resources on projects such as Perth Museum, without fully considering the impact on core library services. While Edinburgh has introduced a tourism levy in order to invest millions in its cultural offering, thousands of overnight stays across Perthshire currently bring in no levy income at all. That needs to change.

Many campaigners across Scotland feel like they are on a treadmill, with proposals to cut libraries being brought back year after year. A total of 53 libraries have closed across Scotland since 2014, and many more are now slated for closure, so it is a critical time right now. The Perth and Kinross Council area is not alone. In my region, library closure proposals in Stirling are back again for consultation, while Clackmannanshire Council is proposing to cut every single library except one.

The Scottish Government’s public library improvement fund is a welcome source of project funding, but it does not stop the systemic reduction in core funding that we are now witnessing. A redefinition of what constitutes statutory library provision, especially in rural areas, is desperately needed, and I would welcome a commitment from the Scottish Government tonight to explore that. What constitutes the “adequate provision” set out in legislation is currently a very low bar, as is the requirement around consultation.

As we look to the next libraries strategy in 2026, now is the time for Government to connect with grass-roots communities and library professionals, hear their voices and act to protect the future.

Libraries must remain the beating heart of our communities, and I look forward to hearing the reflections of other members and the Minister for Public Finance in the debate.