Seòmar agus comataidhean

That is my point. Do we need to import as much crude, and cannot we utilise the North Sea basin and what it is producing to a greater degree? I recognise that there are different types of crude and all the rest of it—

I am sorry to interrupt, but one reason why I asked the question is that this is not just about Scotland. It is also about the set-up of the refineries in the rest of the UK and even in the Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Antwerp triangle that Petroineos talked about. What is the situation in the north-west of Europe at the moment? How old are the refineries and what are their capabilities?

We recognise that oil and gas will still have some part to play in the future—a significant part, in some instances—and it would be much better to deal with that here than to import from some of the more modern refineries in the middle east and China that have been mentioned, not only from the carbon footprint point of view, but also from the energy security point of view. We have to look at the issue holistically. I will ask the UK Government those questions when it comes to the committee.

Yes, there is quite a lot.

We have got a very short period of time. Summarise both very quickly, because I have more questions, as you would imagine.

Why not manufacture SAF here?

Just give us a brief summary. What bothers me about how you are doing things at the moment is that there may be a future impact on confidence in moving some of these projects forward.

I think that we could go on for quite some time about the competitive international market. From an energy security point of view, there have to be changes to that market. To reduce our overall carbon footprint, there have to be changes to that market, as well.

What I am driving at is that we should, from an energy security point of view, be utilising the North Sea basin to the max to save on importing crude and product. Would not it be better to utilise the pipeline from Forties to Kinneil more? Would it be beneficial for Petroineos if the UK Government, in particular, looked at what could be done to help with energy security by investing in it? I am well aware of the 2013 rescue plan, which led to a £9 million grant from the Scottish Government and £125 million of loan security from the UK Government. Is it time to look at security, and loan security, in relation to future energy security and reducing the carbon footprint?

The previous panel, particularly Mr Pritchard, was keen to stress that the announcement will have no impact on the plans for the Scottish cluster and the Acorn project. Is that your understanding? How will the Scottish Government continue to scrutinise the matter to ensure that that is the case?

On the specific point about sustainable aviation fuel, the previous witnesses said that things might happen in one year, two years or three years, but that they would not give a date at this time. That was very vague. I hope that the strategic commercial assets division is managing to get a little more out of people than that.

The witnesses also said that people are masterplanning, and that the master plan might deliver this but maybe not that. My experience of masterplanning is that a course for delivery is set and, if something does not happen, that is a wee bit of a failure, to say the least.

I would like your thoughts on the level of scrutiny that is taking place, and on the Government and the divisions that deal with Prestwick airport banishing that vagueness.

Extraordinary rendition is illegal under international law.