Seòmar agus comataidhean

The supply chain is about an awful lot more than manufacturing. Manufacturing is a part of it, but there is innovation, too. Traditionally, Scotland has always been very good at innovating with technologies, particularly in its subsea work. For example, we are innovating with floating offshore wind developments, and that will be an exportable skill. Once we have completed our ScotWind developments, you will see other countries looking to Scotland to see what we have done with floating offshore wind. As with oil and gas in the 1980s, Scottish engineers and innovators will be going all over the world to help other countries with that technology. It is not just about manufacturing; it is about skills and innovation, too. The supply chain is about an awful lot more than that.

However, I agree that there is absolutely a space for more manufacturing in Scotland. I point out that, as part of the onshore wind sector deal, we pledged to have a blade remanufacturing plant in Scotland. Therefore, there is not just manufacturing, but the remanufacturing of materials in Scotland. Those are all important components.

The aim is to deliver a yes or no decision on a consent application within 52 weeks.

The aim is 52 weeks.

That is why we are increasing the budget to £150 million, which is a tripling of the activity that the monies have done up to now. That tripling will prompt the kind of things that Mr Matheson described as ambitions.

I do not agree that it is slow. I would say that we are probably oversubscribed with the number of projects that want just transition funding. Being a north-easter, I have had the pleasure of visiting quite a lot of projects, including those that have been successful in getting just transition funding.

Other work has also been done. There has been investment in the green hydrogen hub and in the Net Zero Technology Centre. There has been other investment that has not come directly from the just transition fund but that has had a just transition effect.

The just transition fund supported projects as well as a participatory budgeting section, which went out to third sector partner organisations that invited applications from small community groups, for example. At the moment, my officials and I are trying to assess the outcomes of the £75 million that was spent, so that we ensure that the money that is going out from the just transition fund has positive outcomes associated with it and targets the areas where we need intervention in terms of a just transition—that relates to the basis of your question. We have been doing that work over the past year, and it will inform the detail of the next allocation round.

All funds are oversubscribed, but there are certain projects that do not have the right criteria in the way that others do, so you have to make a judgment—you cannot just give out public money without that assessment.

There is a great deal of interest in the fund, and I am delighted to say that we are reopening the fund this year. We are looking at the criteria for the fund and where we might want to target it.

Next year’s allocation might be different, based on what happens this year. However, as far as I am concerned, the £500 million just transition fund is an extremely important tool for the north-east and Moray, and it shows our commitment to an energy transition that is happening principally in those areas.

ACVO. Thank you very much. We are working with them to get that analysis.

I have done quite a lot of visits and talked to people who have been involved in participatory budgeting. A great example is what has been done with a disused bowling green in the city centre, where there is now a climate cafe that makes available its own fruit and vegetables. I highly recommend that you visit it. Those things have had an impact on not just the climate, but the community. I want to take that into account, too.

I am confident that that is happening, but I can get the detail to the committee.

The Government funds only 50 per cent of SEPA’s activities, because it raises revenue for the other half. Operational decisions about how it spends that budget are for SEPA. We want to see that the money that we give to SEPA has been spent wisely. We have a relationship with SEPA in which we oversee how that is done, based on its business plan.

You will forgive me if I do not jump into being the chief executive officer of SEPA. It makes decisions based on its budget. It has revenue generation capacity and capabilities, as well as the £50.2 million that we are giving it in the budget.

That issue is tangential to the budget. We want to ensure that Scotland’s environmental quality is as it should be. SEPA has assessed 87 per cent of Scotland’s water environment as having a high or good classification, and 66 per cent of water bodies are in good ecological condition. We also provide SEPA with a grant from the water environment fund for river basin management. Obviously, when public money is going to SEPA, we want to see that it is improving environmental quality in Scotland. If that is not the case, the Government, and the committee, will discuss that with SEPA.