Seòmar agus comataidhean

I used to be a community councillor before I was a local councillor and before I was an MSP. It is a big commitment for you. I used to go to lots of organisations—you will know that there are loads. Is that asking too much of community council members? Is there another way, or should there be an open invitation for the community council to go to those different organisations?

That sounds like a warning to me.

I will follow up on that question. The point about the need to invest in the infrastructure to avoid our making the mistakes with offshore wind that we made with onshore wind is incredibly well made. Whose responsibility is that? Are we saying that the Government needs to direct things here? The industry does not seem to be delivering here, so is it a matter of the Government intervening more?

I would like to bring in Pat Rafferty at this point. I was struck, Pat, by what your written submission said about the importance of an industrial strategy in fulfilling the potential. What role would that play in tackling some of the issues around the fact that the infrastructure does not seem to be in place?

He would be better with Barcelona, but that is fine.

I will get into bother with the convener if I start getting into supply chain development statements versus conditionality, but that is a well-made point about ScotWind.

Dominic Pritchard, I will follow up something from the GMB submission. We have talked a lot about the importance of the Acorn project to Grangemouth and, in fact, the importance of that project with regard to a jobs-first just transition, because of the opportunities that it brings. However, I noted a concern in the GMB submission that, although hydrogen and carbon capture have the potential to create jobs, they will not do so at a scale that will replace the jobs that will be lost in the carbon-intensive industry. Do you have a view on what the difference will be between what we can create through Acorn and carbon capture and hydrogen, and what we have at the moment?

In effect, it is about delivering more opportunities over and above these. It is not a silver bullet.

I refer members to my voluntary registration as a member of Unite and the GMB.

You mentioned the Scottish cluster, specifically the Acorn project and the fact that it has been awarded track-2 status. How important is that project to a just transition for the Grangemouth area? What are your expectations of receiving the ultimate go-ahead from Government? Are there any barriers, or is it a case of waiting for that go-ahead?

What will ensure that we get the absolute maximum benefits from that? You mentioned earlier the consenting process, and obviously that steady stream of work is increasingly important. However, what other roles do Government and the policy makers need to play to ensure that that investment continues? Will it all come from the private sector? Is there a need for Government investment? What else do we need to do to maximise the potential of ScotWind for Scottish ports?

Good morning. I want to follow up on Colin Beattie and Maggie Chapman’s points. One of the biggest criticisms of the current transition to renewables is that although it may have reduced emissions, it has not delivered economic benefits to Scottish businesses, particularly regarding onshore wind. How do we avoid making the same mistakes when it comes to offshore wind?

Stuart Wallace, what level of investment in port infrastructure in Scotland is needed to ensure that Scottish firms benefit from the opportunities—particularly from, for example, the leasing of the ScotWind projects? Where will the investment come from?

Good morning, minister. You talked about how you are close to reaching the target 50 per cent employment rate for disabled people. The figure specifically for people with autism is a pretty shocking—it is 16 per cent, compared with 73 per cent for the wider population. However, the committee is constantly being told by employers that they have real labour supply shortages. They are obviously missing out on a talented workforce.

Given that that priority group should be supported in order to tackle that low figure, why are organisations that work with young people with autism, for example, being plagued by considerable delays in funding? Many organisations were told that decisions on Government funding would be made by the end of December; they are now being told that decisions are delayed until well into the next financial year. That obviously makes it impossible for them to plan, and in some cases it is leading to their being under threat. They need to hand out redundancy notices to staff because they will not be notified of funding until beyond the current financial year. What has caused those delays, and what is their extent?