Seòmar agus comataidhean

I want to return briefly to the issue of capacity in the Scottish Government’s energy consents unit. Is the Government aware of the concern that exists among some developers, especially those in the pumped hydro storage sector? While the energy consents unit might have additional capacity, they are concerned about whether the Scottish Environment Protection Agency has the capacity to conduct its controlled activities regulations assessments and to report to local authority planning committees when they are considering developments in their area in order to make sure that they can submit those in a timely fashion to the ECU.

The reason why I said that that was a particular issue for the pumped hydro storage sector is that the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets has set a date of 30 September, I think, for the cap and floor and for any developers or projects to have made their bids or applications by then. However, they can do so only if they have a section 36 order in place, and that could be put in jeopardy if SEPA and the local authority do not have the capacity to get their work done to allow that to inform any decision that the ECU may make.

Are you aware of that concern? Are you alive to it, and are you seeking to address it urgently for those developers that might have highlighted that that is an issue of concern for them?

Our eighth item is consideration of an SSI. The instrument was laid under the negative procedure, which means that it will come into force unless the Parliament agrees to a motion to annul it. No such motion has been lodged.

The Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee has drawn an instrument to the attention of the Parliament on the general reporting ground for a minor drafting error in regulation 7(1)—the reference to “paragraphs (2) to (4)” should be a reference to “paragraphs (2) and (3).” Do members have any comments to make on the instrument?

Our second item of business is an evidence session on the legislative consent memorandum that the Scottish Government has lodged on the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, which is a United Kingdom Government bill that is being considered at Westminster. The committee must report on the LCM.

The LCM, which the Scottish Government lodged on 27 March, mentions the need for the Scottish Parliament to consent on two matters: consent for electricity infrastructure, which is covered in clauses 14 to 20, and fees for application for harbour orders, which is covered in clause 42. The LCM also mentions clause 96, which makes commencement and transitional provisions, in so far as those relate to clauses 14 to 20 and 42.

The committee agreed to write to a targeted group of stakeholders to gather evidence on the areas of the bill that are covered by the LCM, and we are thankful to those who responded to our call for evidence. This morning, we will discuss the LCM with the Scottish Government, including any developments since the LCM was lodged and some of the main issues that stakeholders have raised.

I welcome Gillian Martin, Acting Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy, and her supporting officials. Alan Brogan is head of operational delivery at the energy consents unit, Robert Martin is policy and administration team leader at the energy consents unit, and Anne Cairns is a solicitor. I believe that the acting cabinet secretary would like to make a short opening statement before we move to questions.

Thank you. Nick Gosling, head of maritime policy at Transport Scotland, is with us and he can respond as appropriate on any of the harbour order fee issues.

We move to questions, and I start with a question about the concurrent nature of the powers that are provided for in the bill. Why is the Scottish Government content that powers over areas that are wholly within Scotland may also be exercised by ministers at a UK level?

Okay. That is helpful. Thank you.

The result of the division is: For 5, Against 0, Abstentions 1.

Motion agreed to,

That the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee recommends that the Deposit and Return Scheme for Scotland Amendment Regulations 2025 [draft] be approved.

Item 5 is a debate on motion S6M-17470. I invite the cabinet secretary to move the motion.

Motion moved,

That the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee recommends that the Deposit and Return Scheme for Scotland (Designation of Scheme Administrator) Order 2025 [draft] be approved.—[Gillian Martin]

There will be a division.

For

Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP)
Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green)

Abstentions

Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con)

I thank the cabinet secretary and her officials. I will suspend the meeting briefly to allow for a change of witnesses for our next item.

I appreciate the issue of the volume that SEPA is dealing with in this area. The challenge here is the fact that the deadline that has been set for the cap and floor is the end of September, which places a huge amount of pressure on developers to get their applications in or they will miss the deadline.

While SEPA might be dealing with large volumes of applications, some are highly time sensitive. The issue is about SEPA’s ability to make sure that it is able to identify those applications that are highly time sensitive and, where necessary, to expedite the consideration process so that the cap and floor deadline of the end of September can be met.

I presume that the ECU is alive to the issue and is looking for the applications in question to be dealt with in a timely fashion. We are talking about billion-pound projects that could have thousands of jobs associated with them, and if we do not meet the timelines, we might lose the huge opportunity that goes with them.