Seòmar agus comataidhean

When will you be able to issue that advice to both the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament? When we were setting targets in the 2019 act, we were perhaps not getting such formal, solid advice. If the Scottish Parliament were to legislate again on climate targets, we would need to have that cast-iron advice coming from the UK CCC in time to deal with that legislation.

We would expect that to come within the next climate plan. One of the criticisms that you made a number of years ago was that the previous climate plan did not have the numbers in it, so do you expect the next climate plan to have hard figures as to what each and every policy programme will deliver in the years to come?

I appreciate that and your points about needing to learn from the 2019 act and the process around setting targets in that regard.

You offered quite a few reflections on the early climate package that was announced last week around the intent to legislate and you have spoken at length about heat and the positivity around the heat in buildings programme and how that will get us on the right trajectory—not to meet the 2030 targets but certainly to meet the 2045 targets. Do you want to comment on any other elements of that package? You have already spoken about Grangemouth, for example. There is a commitment in the package to see a just transition plan for Mossmorran that will be early and involve workers. There has also been a commitment to finally roll out air departure tax. Do you want to reflect on anything else in that package as potentially signalling a change in Government policy or a welcome acceleration?

I want to ask about checks when things come the other way—from the EU to the UK—and whether that might change the dynamic a little bit. Scott—do you want to comment on that?

Fiona, you mentioned that your sector is a net importer. How do you see things panning out, once the checks are brought in?

I presume that for salmon and shellfish organisations there is less of an issue than there is for your colleagues who operate on the continent and import to the UK. However, that raises a question about how your sectors are working with your European compatriots, in the current political context, to affect EU regulations and to effect change.

Tavish, I am aware that the vast majority of salmon farms in Scotland are owned by Norwegian companies. Does the fact that Norway is in the European Economic Area give you an advantage in terms of being able to influence the European Union through that route? As a multinational industry, does that give you a voice beyond London?

You will be involved in rule making and not just rule taking.

Donna, do you have anything to add on how your sector operates?

Does Douglas Lumsden agree that it would make sense to roll out the flat-fares pilot in a rural area, as well as learning from the experience in Edinburgh?

I appreciate the point that the member makes, but does he recognise that it is important that policy is evidence based? Although we have evidence of what has been done in Lothian, we do not have evidence on how a flat-fare system might work in an urban-rural area of the type that is typical in much of Scotland.

I thank the cabinet secretary for having a debate without a motion. For some members, it has changed the tone; others, unfortunately, are back to their default tone. The launch of the fair fares review has been important, because it now allows a wider conversation to begin. It has been a priority of SNP ministers and Scottish Greens to see the fair fares review to completion.

Last week’s UK Climate Change Committee report was, of course, a wake-up call for us all. Road transport accounts for almost a quarter of Scotland’s carbon emissions, and it is a key area in which we need to make lasting systemic change. We urgently need to shift folks from cars to public transport, but people vote with their feet, and they will make that shift only if the public transport offer is accessible, affordable and reliable.

We absolutely need cheaper fares, and integrated ticketing is key to that. We already have one of the widest concessionary schemes on bus, enabling 2.5 million people to travel for free. Free bus travel is an absolute lifeline for people who face inequality. I welcome the recommitment to expand the scheme on bus for people who are seeking asylum and for people who are suffering from drug dependency. I also welcome the new pilot project to extend free travel on ScotRail for companions of people who hold a blind person’s concessionary travel card. I look forward to updates on all that work when possible.

Of course, there is much more that we can do beyond the concessionary schemes to ensure that public transport is affordable for all. I warmly welcome the flat-fare trial. Councils that span both rural and urban areas and are working hard to restore bus services with communities will be well placed to trial a flat fare as part of a package to reboot local bus services. The off-peak-all-day pilot on ScotRail will also give us evidence of how simplifying fares on the railways has worked in relation to both farebox income and passenger numbers.

The next step is to join up our fragmented public transport network. I am pleased to see a commitment to a national integrated ticketing system and an all-age national travel card and fare structure. It is so obvious that having a card or an app that joins everything up makes sense. Shetland manages to do it, and Glasgow offered it during the 26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—COP26—so, in time, we can surely get that approach rolled out everywhere else.

Having mentioned Shetland, I welcome the commitment to extend not just the national concessionary ferry scheme to under-22s, but to move beyond that commitment and offer free fares for under-22s on interisland ferries. That will be liberating for young people who live in our islands. I also note that the road equivalent tariff will continue, but I welcome the intention to strike a better balance that supports island residents first and foremost in the design of that scheme.

Many members have reflected on the need to fix the broken models that have left communities without decent bus services. For too long, rural bus routes have been vulnerable to the boom and bust cycle of deregulation and privatisation. In the past month alone, we have seen lifeline routes such as the C60 between Killin and Callander, which I mentioned earlier, and the X7 in the Carse of Gowrie axed. Our communities deserve better. With SPT recently deciding to push forward with franchising, the future is looking brighter. Public and community ownership can bring genuine benefits to bus services, whether in Glasgow or rural Perthshire, and now is the time to start accelerating progress.

Undoubtedly, we need radical improvements to public transport. If we are serious about making that a reality, we need to redirect some of the capital away from carbon-intensive roads and into the infrastructure that we need for sustainable transport. Instead of doubling down on new road-building projects, we need to invest in the infrastructure that will supercharge our public transport across Scotland.

Demand-management measures and road-user charging models could be used to fund public transport improvements while they also reduce our transport emissions. I ask members to imagine what the impact of the congestion charge would have been in Edinburgh had it been brought in 20 years ago after that debate, and what kind of investment we would have been able to achieve in our public transport infrastructure in the city.