Seòmar agus comataidhean

Yes, it is important that we look at all the other methods that we can use to tackle some of those issues in the islands. I could mention a number of different projects. Maybe the approach comes across as a bit piecemeal, as though we are not thinking across the piece, but, through the action plan, we have the opportunity to bring all of that together in one strategic plan. Again, whether it is Airbnb properties or second homes, which you spoke about, we need to tackle all of that as well as building new houses. I do not know whether that answers your question.

I am aware that skills are an issue across our islands, and we outlined in the national islands plan annual report some of the actions that are being taken; a number of different projects are under way.

In relation to the delivery of the islands programme and some of the challenges that projects have come up against, there is a particular issue with construction skills and ensuring that we have a construction workforce. Work on that is being done nationally, and work has been undertaken to get the Scottish vocational qualification on a par with other SVQs that we have in place. The Minister for Higher and Further Education has been leading that work, and he had a round-table discussion with all the interested stakeholders just last month to look at how we can do work on that and address some of the challenges with it.

A pilot project took place in Uist earlier this year, which was about retaining skills. Erica Clarkson may be able to give an update on that, and I would be happy to provide further information to the committee on it. That was a specific skills pilot, and we are keen to take learning from it. Mapping is being done of the skills that will be needed for the industries that we will need for the carbon-neutral islands project as well.

We have focused on the infrastructure and capital spend of the islands programme, but it is important not to forget that we also have resource spending, which funds other important projects. For example, the islands scholarship scheme is about how we attract and retain students who live on our islands and make sure that we match them to the skills that we need for the future. There are a number of strands in that. There is also work through the islands growth deal.

I am happy to provide more detail. I will bring Erica Clarkson in, because the islands team in the Scottish Government works closely with other departments across the Scottish Government on the funding. At a ministerial level, we ensure that we have engagement across the piece. For example, you will be aware that we are developing the remote, rural and islands housing action plan. There has been strong engagement between our teams on the actions that will come forward as a result of that.

I know that the committee has raised concerns, via local authorities and other bodies, about all the different strands of funding that exist across the piece and how they could be better aligned. The islands team works to ensure that we meet our obligations under the Islands (Scotland) Act 2018, but those other funds also help us to deliver against our strategic objectives in the national islands plan. For example, the islands team works closely with the Scottish Futures Trust to look across Government and make sure that we avoid crossovers on deadlines when it comes to applications to the islands programme and to other funds. We are trying to minimise the impact on bodies that apply to the various funds.

I will hand over to Erica, who might want to add some more information to that.

I will turn to Erica Clarkson in a moment to talk about the specific issue of funding.

I absolutely echo what you said at the start about the contribution that is being made by the development officers, because they have been doing fantastic work. They are embedded in the communities, and that has been fantastic. I have had the chance to meet them and speak directly to them and it has been great to see the work that they are undertaking. The carbon-neutral islands project takes a bottom-up approach, ensuring that communities are involved and are part of the process from the very start.

Regarding the long-term funding, you are probably aware that we provided an update on the project in January this year. We have undertaken the carbon audits and, following on from that work, each island involved in the project has published a climate change action plan.

The next stage in the process is to look at the investment strategies for the future. Public funding will never be able to fill all the gaps in the work on climate and nature, much as we might want it to, which is why private investment and other sources of investment will be important. The work that is taking place on those investment strategies will be critical for the future. From a budgetary perspective, we want to enable the process and will continue working with communities so that that work can happen.

Erica, do you want to add more?

The point about the lessons learned from projects that have not been successful through the competitive bid process is important. It has allowed us and the SFT to work with the projects that have not been successful to ensure that it is not necessarily the case that the project cannot ever happen, because it can be worked into a space where it can potentially be submitted in a following year. The role of the SFT has been critical in that. We have worked with it for a long time. It is an infrastructure expert, and I think that it has been mentioned to the committee before that the SFT has been critical for support and advice—even in informal conversations about applications, which local authorities have found invaluable when going through the process.

I also highlight the funding for energy efficiency measures of up to £38,000 in the croft house grant this year. That is particular to crofting, but such measures are important. A number of other Government-led schemes are also happening, such as the fuel insecurity fund area-based schemes. I am more than happy to provide further information on those schemes to the committee.

In fact, the Minister for Transport also attends some of those meetings. There used to be a transport and islands group, and it makes sense that we do not do that work in isolation, so her attendance has become a regular part of those meetings. I want to provide reassurance about that.

I am confident that that is happening, because, as we have said in relation to the guidance and what we look for in project applications, we have a strong weighting towards projects that deliver against the national islands plan’s objectives, of which addressing fuel poverty is one.

We know that there are significant issues there, but I highlight that there is funding available other than through the islands programme. For example, we supported a number of recent initiatives through the islands cost crisis emergency fund. We provided £1.4 million of funding last year and supplemented that with another £1 million this year to address the most critical need, because we know about the increased costs that people who live on our islands face. If it would be helpful, I would be happy to provide a breakdown to the committee of how that funding is being spent.

In essence, we wanted to make sure that we got that money to local authorities as quickly as possible, for them to spend as they saw fit. In Shetland, it has been used to fund free school breakfasts, and it has been used to continue or supplement existing work in other island areas. I am happy to provide more information on that, if it would be helpful.

The Bew review funds are ring fenced for agriculture. You will be aware that we set out in the overall programme how the £51 million of funding over three years was going to be returned to the portfolio. I do not know the specific figure that you refer to, or in what year that became apparent. Is that in relation to the figures that we discussed previously?

I point to what we have already published on that. We do not have the exact details of what will be involved in a future scheme, but we have tried to share our thinking in that regard, which gives a general direction as to the measures that we will consider, including in future support. We have also set out the route map and timeline for when more information will become available to people.

Alongside the route map that we published earlier this year, we published the list of measures, but it is by no means a definitive list and it is not final. I think that there are links in the online publications for people to provide us with feedback and information. The list sets out some examples of how the different measures can interact and what that would mean for different types of business. It also outlines some of the measures that we might include as part of final support. It does not cover all sectors, because we know that more work needs to be done.

I emphasise that, as I have already stated, there will be no cliff edges in support. We have said that the schemes that people are currently on will continue until we transition at various points. That is all set out in the route map.

Although we cannot set out the detail of a scheme, we have set out what our thinking is at the moment in order to give some clarity and direction so that people know what we are considering for the future.