Seòmar agus comataidhean

It is widely recognised that the increase in renewables, particularly in onshore wind power, has cut emissions but has not delivered the huge potential economic benefits that were envisaged, especially for jobs. The Scottish Trades Union Congress made that point in its response to the publication of the strategy.

When you were Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth, we were promised that there would be 130,000 jobs in renewables per year by 2020. The Government does not record the numbers of such jobs, but a recent report by the Fraser of Allander Institute estimated that the actual number is only 27,000 per year. Does the Government currently have a target for jobs in renewables, which the strategy might help to deliver?

How do we measure that? At the moment, most of the onshore wind turbines that we see carpeted across our landscape are not built here in Scotland. How can we assess whether we are reaching that potential? The number of jobs in renewables will increase because of the work that is taking place, but how do we assess whether that is delivering the scale of the potential that is clearly out there?

I turn to Jon O’Sullivan from EDF Renewables and ask him the same question. Jon, you said that there were gaps in the energy strategy in respect of some of the targets around production. For me, the biggest gap related to jobs. What is the target for jobs?

You might think that I want that target so that I can assess whether you are delivering jobs in Scotland and not handing contracts overseas, but a target would flag up where there was a problem with the capacity in the supply chain or whatever the reasons were for jobs not coming to Scotland. I presume that you would support having proper data so that we can not only hold your feet to the fire to ensure that you are creating the 50 jobs in Eyemouth that you mentioned, which I have a keen interest in, but ensure that that is the maximum number of jobs. If there is a barrier to that, we need to break it down.

Good morning. I will follow up on a point that Claire Mack mentioned about how we measure economic success in renewables. There is no doubt that there has been good progress in the role of energy production in cutting emissions in Scotland, particularly through onshore wind energy. However, it is probably fair to say that that has not yet translated into the maximum number of job opportunities. In 2010, the Government’s “A Low Carbon Economic Strategy for Scotland” promised 130,000 renewables jobs by 2020. I remember being told that we would be the Saudi Arabia of renewables.

Claire, you mentioned the recent report by the Fraser of Allander Institute, “The Economic Impact of Scotland’s Renewable Energy Sector—2022 Update”, which estimated that the number of renewables jobs was 27,000, which is about a fifth of the target.

The first thing that struck me was that that was an estimate, because we do not seem to gather data on renewables jobs. The second thing that struck me was that, yesterday, when the cabinet secretary outlined the draft energy strategy and just transition plan, he used the term “low-carbon jobs”, which I think that Jon O’Sullivan mentioned, and the potential to reach 77,000 jobs. Obviously, that includes jobs in the nuclear industry. Then, during the discussion, he used the phrase “green jobs”. Three different terms for renewables jobs were used in the course of one discussion.

There is clearly a gap in the data, so what exactly should we measure when it comes to the economic benefits of the expansion of renewables? How do I and other politicians know that we are maximising the opportunities? You will all be able to tell me that companies are awarding contracts to Scottish firms and have created X jobs, but you will probably not tell me when the contracts go to overseas firms. How do I know that we are getting the maximum number of jobs and, if we are not, whether there is a barrier?

It is only fair to start with Claire Mack because she mentioned the topic and Scottish Renewables commissioned the work from the Fraser of Allander Institute in the first place.

Those are important points, but I am still struggling with why we are not measuring any of those things at the moment. Why do you have to do the work? When we politicians set targets, why do you have to measure what progress is being made on them?

James Reid has a keen interest in ensuring that we maximise supply chain jobs in Scotland. How do I know that companies such as FES Energy are getting those opportunities and that they are not, in effect, being offshored? Is that a challenge that you face, or is so much work going around that it is actually fine?

Similar to Michelle Thomson, I will make a pitch for disaggregating data on the basis of geography. That is helpful.

I am sorry. I meant Clare, not Carolyn. I have a question for you in a second, Carolyn. You are not getting off lightly.

Good morning. I want to focus specifically on small businesses in rural areas. I was conscious of the point that Carolyn Currie made about the feedback from Highlands and Islands Enterprise about business confidence levels among rural and remote businesses.

This morning, I have just had a message from a business in my South Scotland region. A butcher is highlighting the fact that for, for obvious reasons, energy costs are crippling his business, and he makes the point that, if his business goes, there will be no other butcher in the main street of his small town.

I will start with Stacey Dingwall. To what extent are the current business pressures having a disproportionate impact on small businesses in rural areas? Should the Government be considering a particular policy intervention specifically for those rural businesses?

Are you seeing a higher proportion of business failures—it is not a great phrase—among members in rural areas than among members in urban areas, or are they happening across the board?