Seòmar agus comataidhean

I must apologise to you, too, Douglas.

I want to drill down a bit into the draft climate change plan. Annex 2 addresses sectoral changes. When it comes to transport, on page 51, it says:

“In order to achieve our Net Zero targets in relation to the transport sector, action will be required to be taken by all members of society, from the general public, businesses, public sector organisations as well as all levels of government”,

which seems to be a call to arms. Then, on page 28 of annex 3, the total gross cost for achieving net zero in the transport sector is shown as about £12.7 billion and the net cost as £6.9 billion.

Can someone help me understand who is paying the £12.7 billion? Where is it coming from and where is it going? On the basis that you have all read the paper, Adrian Davis, do you want to have a go at answering?

I understand that you did not write the plan, but you come to this meeting with a huge amount of knowledge. We are expecting everyone to read, understand and sign up to the plan, and not understanding or identifying the costs makes it more difficult for people. Do you want to have a go at that question, Sara?

Phasing out private cars appears to be the direction of the plan, but, for a lot of rural people, private cars form the basis of just getting to a hospital appointment.

I will go on to my pet subject, which you will not be surprised to hear is figures. Page 45 in annex 3 gives the figures for the cost of the climate change plan. It appears that, in every year, the benefits outweigh the costs of doing things, which is interesting. In the first period, from 2026 to 2030, the net costs are £89.9 million, and that includes the costs of a deposit return scheme, although we know that those figures are perhaps not quite in line with what the industry thinks are the costs.

Are you happy that the net costs in the climate change plan for waste management are reasonable, or are they lower because there are hidden costs of the burning of waste?

Iain Gulland, I do not have any confidence in the figures, but you will have looked at them and will have huge confidence in them, surely. Do you want to start us off?

In the earlier session, we heard about changing attitudes and getting people to buy into the plan and understand the costs and the benefits. That is what I am trying to drill down into, because I am struggling to understand them.

Kim Pratt, you are probably happy that the costs in annex 3, on page 45, are exactly right. Are you happy?

I understand your enthusiasm for the subject, but let me ask you a question about plastics, because you are saying that there is a huge cost. If plastics have been considered, would you expect to see the benefit side of the equation reducing or increasing as a result of not having them? Are you confident that the £1.3 billion of benefits in the first period includes the cost of not having so much plastic in the economy, or do you think that that has just been ignored?

You are drifting away from my original question. Are you happy with the figures in the draft plan?

Welcome back. We are now in public for our third item of business, which is an evidence session on the Scottish Government’s draft climate change plan. The plan sets out how the Government intends to meet its carbon emissions reduction targets. The committee is leading a cross-committee effort to scrutinise the draft plan. The Scottish Government has said that it will lay the final plan before the Parliament is dissolved at the end of March. Everyone giving evidence today will be contributing to a report that we will publish in late February. A debate in the chamber will follow.

I welcome to the meeting Professor Adrian Davis, transport research institute, Edinburgh Napier University; Professor Rachel Aldred, University of Westminster; Lamech Solomon, head of decarbonisation policy, Logistics UK; and Sara Collier, senior public affairs manager for the Confederation of Passenger Transport. Thank you all for attending this morning.

This evidence session will cover all the main aspects of the transport sector. I note that we discussed electric vehicles and charging points at the meeting on 16 December, so I feel that that part has probably largely been covered, although we may come back to it.

In the normal way in this committee, I get to ask the introductory questions, which are meant to be a gentle warmer into the bank to give you each a chance to say what you think. Are the policies that are set out in the draft climate change plan sufficient to deliver the Scottish Government’s overarching goals for car use reduction and modal shift, including in the freight sector?

The answer could just be yes or no, but I suspect that you will want to say a bit more than that. I remind you that there are four of you, so if somebody wants to say something that somebody else has already said, it would be better just to say, “I agree with so-and-so,” rather than repeating it all, because time is of the essence.

Professor Davis, do you want to start?

Mark Ruskell wants to come in briefly.