Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you.

Good morning. Where are we at the moment in the EU institutional cycle? How are third countries, but also countries that are sub-states that are part of third countries, engaging with that institutional cycle process at the moment? What are the strategic areas? How are such countries engaging with those? I would like to start with Mr Salamone.

Good morning, Mr McAllister. It is nice that you are in front of the committee.

I want to ask you about transparency, particularly in relation to the parliamentary partnership assembly. What expectations do MEPs have about how open and transparent the workings of that assembly will be? I am thinking in particular about the long-established rights that we have as European citizens to be part of open policy making and in relation to the business of policy making and scrutiny being open and democratic. What demands will MEPs make on how accessible the workings of that assembly will be? What will be the implications for European citizens?

I thank the minister for her statement and, in particular, the increased funding for the culture collective and the Scottish Crannog Centre. We have all had incredible experiences at the centre. It is an absolute time machine and it would be great to see the crannog recreated.

The statement underlines the importance of the creative sector to wellbeing, regeneration, place making and mental health. The sector consists of busy, creative organisations, but they often spend a lot of time applying for annual funding year after year. A lot of creative time is wasted through that funding process, so what hope can the minister give us that we will move to a multiyear funding process that ensures that creative organisations have the certainty to invest in their communities and deliver all the amazing wellbeing benefits that we are used to them delivering?

As the Longannet chimney was demolished this morning, I am sure that the First Minister felt that it was an historic moment in our journey towards net zero. It was, however, also a moment to reflect on our gratitude to the workers who kept our lights on for so many decades. Are there lessons for a wider just transition that we can learn from the way in which Longannet was shut back in 2016?

I welcome the broad intention of the instrument, particularly given the 26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—COP26—and the commitments that were made around methane reduction, and also the need to improve the ecological condition of our fresh water resources.

My slight concern with the instrument is about the choice of cut-off point for transitional arrangements. Larger farms will have to move quickly in dealing with slurry in a more responsible way but, for smaller farms, there will be a delay. There will be a transitional period of up to five years, with the regulations not really taking effect until 2027. That leaves us just three years before we are meant to meet the 30 per cent methane reduction target.

I do not object to what we have before us, but I would like to find out more information from the Scottish Government about where it drew the line in allowing smaller farms to adapt over a much longer period. More information would be useful to understand the Scottish Government’s thinking on the matter, and to understand which trade bodies and others the lobbying came from.

Is there any potential threat from the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, or will we move towards alignment of regulations across the UK? Are any industry sectors or players still holding out for a market for drinking straws or anything else?

Will the member give way?

Post COP26, this is a critical time at which to double down on the climate science while ramping up action on a just transition. Of course, the oil and gas corporations have funded climate denial for decades, so it is no wonder that recent polling shows that the majority of the public do not trust them to lead the just transition.

However, the oil and gas workers deserve our respect, support and solidarity for the huge contribution that they have made to our energy needs since the 1970s. Those workers should be the people who lead the just transition, but for years they have faced uncertainty in a boom-and-bust sector.

Despite the UK Government’s having donated an eye-watering £13.6 billion of tax subsidy to the oil and gas sector since the Paris agreement was signed, major job losses continue; there have been more than 10,000 jobs lost in the oil and gas sector in the past year. That is in a sector that directly employs just over 30,000 people. Nearly three quarters of workers in it are now employed ad hoc, as contractors. It is no wonder that, in a recent survey, more than 80 per cent of oil and gas workers said that they would consider moving to a different sector, with over half of respondents being interested in renewables and offshore wind. Job security was cited as the biggest factor in that survey.

The UK policy of maximum economic recovery of oil and gas does not help with the just transition. It postpones action, drags investment away from renewables and creates a future cliff edge for workers. It also critically undermines the global UN climate negotiations, making it impossible to ask countries to adopt the language of phasing out coal when we will not phase out our own oil and gas.

That policy of maximum economic recovery could lead to a future sudden collapse in jobs, should climate impacts lead to a high carbon price shutting down production. If we can learn anything from the Tories’ brutal dismantling of the coal industry in the 1980s, it is that such sudden collapses punish communities for generations.

I do not have time, unfortunately.

It is absurd to say that stopping the Cambo field would mean turning off the taps on North Sea oil and gas and lead to that kind of unmanaged collapse. There are already 6.5 billion barrels of oil in more than 200 already-licensed fields in the North Sea. That is enough to see us through years of energy transition. It is clear that Cambo would be disastrous. The emissions from burning all 800 million barrels of oil in the field would be 10 times Scotland’s annual emissions and would last well beyond 2045, when we are meant to be a net zero country.

Where would the jobs from Cambo be? Siccar Point Energy has said that the engineering and construction work would be outsourced to a firm that is based in Singapore. The operation is designed to need just 100 to 150 staff, who could end up being drafted in from anywhere in the world.

Calling a halt to Cambo and other new fields is the start of a managed transition rather than the start of a future that is based on the economic chaos of stranded assets that we cannot afford to burn. There have been years of warnings—from those by Mark Carney to the ones from the International Energy Agency—about exactly that scenario.

The announcement of the turbine tower factory at Nigg last week was a hugely important step. It needs to be the first of many more announcements that build a high-value supply chain in Scotland with good-quality and fair jobs.

The just transition must follow the climate science, but it must be designed by the women and men whose livelihoods depend on its success, instead of our listening wholly to corporate boardrooms, which have continually let workers and our climate down for many years.