Seòmar agus comataidhean

Do you anticipate our legislation needing any changes in the short-to-medium term to make sure that there is not a situation where there is a more attractive investment proposition in England because of new powers of the Crown Estate? Crown Estate Scotland would then be playing catch-up due to the borrowing powers limitations that currently exist. I am just trying to understand whether there are risks there, and, if there are, how quickly those could be mitigated.

You would prefer a level playing field.

I have a follow-up question. I think that you have allowed a 3 per cent contingency for the four large vessels that are currently being constructed in Turkey. It was good that you put on the record some of the pressures and strains that exist at the moment. Is that 3 per cent figure adequate, or do you expect that it might need to go up? Will you need to use it?

I will briefly go back to the question about liquefied natural gas propulsion. There has been a lot of discussion in the press about whether the carbon emissions are higher or lower, and there was a discussion earlier about the weight of the vessel and everything else. I take it that neither the Glen Sannox nor the Glen Rosa will be part of the UK emissions trading scheme, because of their weight. Is that right?

Why not?

CalMac has a target for reducing carbon emissions, and that will be part of the national carbon accounts for transport and reduction of emissions. At some point, all this stuff has to be verified.

Thanks for that. I am thinking about where we are with our energy policy and the energy strategy just transition plan. Is that, in its draft form, well aligned with the objectives of GB Energy? If GB Energy feeds into the energy strategy just transition plan, would there be a need to update it on the back of GB Energy coming into some form of existence, or is everything well aligned anyway?

GB Energy will be quite closely aligned with GB Nuclear. Is there an acceptance in the UK Government of this Government’s policy on nuclear in national performance framework 4?

If they were in the ETS, there would be MRV—monitoring, reporting and verification of emissions. Should you be doing that anyway, independently, then we could avoid discussion in the press about whether there are higher carbon emissions? Should emissions be independently monitored and verified, as would be the case if the ships were over 5,000 tonnes?

Is that done independently and is it independently verified?