Skip to main content
Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 12 March 2026
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1783 contributions

|

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Draft Climate Change Plan

Meeting date: 3 March 2026

Kevin Stewart

:In my constituency, it is the majority of folk, quite frankly. In energy-rich Aberdeen, we are the ones who are being screwed, which, unfortunately, has always been the case.

It may well be that the Climate Change Committee does not have the remit to look at every aspect of market reform and all the rest of it, but you are advisers to the UK and Scottish Governments and, surely, because you have talked about all the risks—change at the level of households is one of the biggest risks—those conversations have to include a drive towards cheaper electricity.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Draft Climate Change Plan

Meeting date: 3 March 2026

Kevin Stewart

:I am glad that we violently agree; we got there eventually.

I will turn to another point that you covered earlier, which is about utilising the North Sea basin rather than importing resources. You talked about the counterfactuality of using domestic supply compared with importing oil and gas, and you said that that is a complicated area. I do not disagree with you on that front. You offered to brief the committee further, which we would welcome. However, the difficulty is that briefing the committee will not get the message about your reasoning on the counterfactuality out to the public.

You may say that this is not in your remit, but surely it would be wiser to utilise resource here, which is often less carbon intense, than to import liquefied natural gas from Qatar. With the current volatility, who knows whether that will even be possible in the future?

Beyond that, what are you and others looking at regarding jobs? Utilising our own resource, rather than importing, would protect jobs here, rather than in Qatar, the United States or elsewhere.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

NatureScot (Annual Report and Accounts and Future Priorities)

Meeting date: 17 February 2026

Kevin Stewart

It would be interesting for the committee to get examples of where you think comments have crossed the line and where they have had an impact on your staff. I would also ask you to recognise the difference between scrutiny and what you may think is crossing the line.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

NatureScot (Annual Report and Accounts and Future Priorities)

Meeting date: 17 February 2026

Kevin Stewart

One of my colleagues will probably go into more depth about this, but are there conflicts of interest with some of the assessments that you are carrying out because you are also a statutory consultee?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

NatureScot (Annual Report and Accounts and Future Priorities)

Meeting date: 17 February 2026

Kevin Stewart

I am not trying to trap you in any pitfalls here, Mr Halfhide. You said that you do not understand the question, but the question about conflicts is asked by a number of people. I would have thought that you might have tried to find an answer for those folks who are sceptical and think that conflicts exist.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

NatureScot (Annual Report and Accounts and Future Priorities)

Meeting date: 17 February 2026

Kevin Stewart

Professor Higgins, as a board member, can you counter some of the folks who question your role and say that there may be conflicts?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 17 February 2026

Kevin Stewart

I would not say that I have knowledge, but the minister is correct in saying that 1 per cent is not a huge amount for the administration of any scheme. If most schemes were run with 1 per cent spent on admin costs, that would be good.

The minister has agreed to send a breakdown to the committee. It would be useful for us to see every aspect of the administration cost, including for the scrutiny of the schemes, because some folk have questioned whether there could be abuses of the scheme by operators through ticketing and all the rest of it.

When I was the minister for transport for a short period of time, I asked for a fair amount of scrutiny, to ensure that we were getting the best value for money. If we could have those breakdowns—including scrutiny of the 1 per cent—that would be wonderful.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 17 February 2026

Kevin Stewart

In those discussions, it might be found that the removal of bus passes in such cases would require further legislative change that is outwith your remit. However, thank you for that commitment.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

NatureScot (Annual Report and Accounts and Future Priorities)

Meeting date: 17 February 2026

Kevin Stewart

On peatland and nature restoration—and on peatland restoration in particular—we have already heard from Professor Higgins, just a few minutes ago, about an example of the University of Edinburgh investing in peatland restoration. Are there other examples of private finance that you think can be used? Are there any changes to taxation that you think might be viable for peatland restoration? Given the importance of peatland restoration not only to Scotland’s climate change plan but to the UK’s climate change plan, do think that the UK Treasury should invest more in peatland restoration?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

NatureScot (Annual Report and Accounts and Future Priorities)

Meeting date: 17 February 2026

Kevin Stewart

I return to my point about whether the UK Treasury should be investing more. You said that we need continuous multiyear funding in order to get this right. Do the funding streams need to change from the HMT level to become multiyear in order that we get this right?