Renewable Energy (Highlands and Islands)
The final item of business today is a members' business debate on motion S2M-1674, in the name of Maureen Macmillan, on the development and manufacture of renewable energy.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament congratulates Highlands and Islands Renewable Energy Group and the trade union Amicus on their initiative to promote the development and manufacture of renewable energy structures, whether for wind, wave or tidal power, in the Highlands and Islands; recognises that there is a skilled engineering workforce available locally; further recognises the considerable socio-economic benefits that would flow from this work to the nearby communities; believes that renewable energy infrastructure would be better supported by these communities if they perceived that it was bringing local economic benefit, and therefore believes that the Scottish Executive should do all it can to support Highland-based companies in bidding for renewables contracts in Scotland and elsewhere.
Before the recess, we had an excellent debate on the Enterprise and Culture Committee's report on renewable energy and I indicated then that I felt that we needed to explore in more depth how we can best capitalise on the growth of renewables in terms of the employment that can be created in Scotland in the engineering, construction and assembly of turbines, whether wind or marine. There are particular opportunities for the Highlands and Islands, which is the region that I represent. There is already a success story at Vestas-Celtic Wind Technology Ltd in Kintyre.
I am grateful to all who signed my motion and to those who are attending the debate. I thank Amicus and the Highland renewable energy group, which gave a presentation in the Parliament at lunch time today.
The renewables revolution has enormous potential to bring benefits to Scotland, particularly to the Highlands and Islands, but jobs will not be handed to us on a plate. It will require a concerted effort and close partnership working among the Executive, the Department of Trade and Industry, Highlands and Islands Enterprise and businesses themselves to ensure that our engineering firms have every possible chance of gaining contracts.
Five years ago, around 5,000 people in the fabrication yards at Nigg and Ardersier were working on a gas platform for Elf Oil and a subsea structure for Texaco. Those were the last orders that the yards received and their closure was a severe blow to the communities around the Moray firth, because two thirds of the work force was based in the region.
HIE is to be congratulated on its efforts to attract new employment to the area, but the fact remains that there are under-used engineering facilities on the sites, while riggers fill shelves in Tesco or work overseas because there is no local work that requires their skills. The skills that were used to build oil-production platforms are more than adequate for building, erecting and installing wind, wave or tidal turbines. That has been pointed out time and again by Amicus, which has lobbied ministers over the past six months, at the Scottish Parliament and at the Scottish Trades Union Congress conference, to make them aware of the skills and facilities on offer.
The Highlands renewable energy group, which is a consortium of engineering firms in the Moray firth area, has also been active. For example, Mike Kidd of Isleburn, Mackay & Macleod Ltd gave a presentation to a joint meeting of the cross-party group on renewable energy and the cross-party group on oil and gas on the urgent need for Government support to bring renewables engineering work to the Highlands, where most of the projects will be sited.
At the beginning of September, I attended the Highland renewables expertise exhibition at the Nigg yard and was encouraged by the diverse local engineering skills on offer to the renewables industry, from a firm from Glenelg in Lochalsh that provides anemometers for testing the suitability of sites for wind farms, to large, Scotland-wide firms that have interests all round the country and are particularly interested in marine energy.
The engineering shed and dry dock at Nigg are huge assets that we need to utilise. Is the Executive engaging with the current American owners to secure the shed's future use? At present, it is possible to obtain only a six-month lease of the shed, which hardly gives stability to a fledgling industry. Are local firms being given a chance to bid, or are they being shut out from already established supply chains? Isleburn, Mackay & Macleod has expertise in wind turbines, having worked on the Scroby sands development. However, Mike Kidd told the cross-party group on renewable energy that, as newcomers compared with the Danes or the Germans, it is difficult to break into the magic circle.
Surely there are European Union rules that should give us a level playing field. Just as some community gain is expected from the revenue from wind farms, so it should be expected that engineering firms in the area will be able to bid for the work. Alasdair Morrison will know that that is being achieved in the Western Isles.
Maureen Macmillan mentioned Alasdair Morrison's constituency, the Western Isles. Does she agree that the recent comment by Angus Graham that RSPB Scotland's objection to the substantial proposed development in the Western Isles is not something that we should welcome? Does she also agree that we should invite RSPB Scotland to explain why it has decided to object in that case but not, apparently, to other wind turbines in Scotland as well as its criteria for saying that some projects are bad but others are not?
I want to get on. I understand that there must be a balance between the environmental concerns of organisations such as RSPB Scotland and the needs of communities.
I want to talk more about the European procurement rules, because they seem to allow countries such as Spain to have all manufacturing for renewables in Spain based in Spain. Why cannot we do the same? There is a strong feeling in the local industry that the Executive and the DTI are not supporting its bids for work in the way that their counterparts in other countries do. Other European countries have remarked on the lack of lobbying by the Government.
I have concentrated on the assembly of wind turbines because it is onshore wind farms that are being developed.
People in the Highlands need to receive genuine local benefits, by which I mean not just income for a particular community but benefits to the local work force. Although local authorities cannot set such planning conditions, they can surely be encouraged to make generating companies aware of their concern that work is not going to local companies.
Further into the future, wave and tidal devices that are still at the research stage will be manufactured. Wavegen Projects Ltd is well established at Inverness; the Pelamis wave machine is being developed at the European Marine Energy Centre in Orkney; and the Archimedes wave swing is being tested in Portugal and will finish its trials in the northern isles. Those emerging technologies must be supported until they are commercially viable. I welcome the recent creation of AWS Ocean Energy Ltd, a partnership between a Highland company and a Dutch company, which could herald a breakthrough in bringing significant renewable energy manufacturing to the Highlands.
We also look forward to the development of offshore wind power, particularly Talisman Energy (UK) Ltd's Beatrice field project, which will provide another opportunity—albeit some years away—to establish marine-related renewables work in Scotland.
Our communities are hungry for this work and feel that they should not have to experience downsides, such as having to extend the grid, which is what all forms of renewables entail, and the intrusion—as some would see it—of wind farms into the countryside, without benefiting from substantial revenue and the prospect that a substantial number of jobs will be created as a result of the manufacture and assembly of wind, wave or tide turbines. Scottish and Southern Energy has identified that all forms of renewables have the potential to create 6,000MW of renewable energy in the Highlands and Islands, and there has been a steady stream of inquiries from marine energy turbine developers seeking a foothold in the area.
Vestas-Celtic Wind Technology Ltd in Argyll stands as an example of what can be achieved. Its work force is 85 per cent local, which has halved the unemployment rate in Campbeltown. As the onshore wind energy market steadies, more Danish and German companies will follow Vestas and seek bases in Scotland. If the support is right, they will work in partnership with local companies.
I urge the Executive to do all that it can to encourage that stability and to work closely with the DTI, the trade unions and our large and small engineering companies to ensure that opportunities in all forms of renewables are maximised and that skills and yards that have lain dormant are used again to benefit a new generation. The marine energy sub-group of the forum for renewable energy development in Scotland predicts that between 5,000 and 7,000 jobs could be created through marine energy. Although we should work towards that aim, we should also see what we can do now to deliver wind turbine work to our communities.
I thank Maureen Macmillan for securing the debate. It has found wide support in the Highlands, where the population has been far too quiet about its belief in using local manufacturing bases in the development of wind, wave and tidal power. A small number of people have written a plethora of letters to the papers, opposing such developments; however, many in the Highlands and Islands want the Government in Scotland to give a lead to ensure that local people benefit in the long term from the manufacture of renewables.
I welcome the Highlands and Islands renewable energy group's attempts to focus on how locally available skills can be applied. In fact, any local benefits could be enhanced if local people owned more of these schemes. Given that many locally based industrialists and trade unionists are involved in the group, I hope that they will seek out people in local communities for that very purpose.
In Caithness, one applicant who is developing a project on his father's farm in Stirkoke has brought the neighbours and the local community on board, which shows that a small, locally owned wind farm can have wide support. At the same time, at our surgeries, we are inundated by the many people who do not want to be surrounded by wind farms, especially those that have been developed by incoming companies. As a result, it is important that the debate focuses on how local people, particularly those who are already based in the Highlands, can own and develop such schemes. Maureen Macmillan's point is well taken.
We need to establish a clearer picture of the work that the Scottish Executive will do to allow that to happen, because it has an influence over HIE, which is somewhat late in the game in backing much of this kind of work. The wind farm in our community in Evanton has been bringing a benefit to the community for six years, but HIE has had a strategy in this respect for only two years. I believe that the new chairman of HIE might well want to adopt a more proactive position on the matter. The cross-party group of MSPs who will meet him soon will want to emphasise that.
On the potential to develop expertise, it would be useful to know whether we could construct underground lines that could in some places replace the pylons and overhead lines that are so contentious. It would be interesting to know whether, as my colleague Jean Urquhart has suggested, we could use Norwegian technology to much reduce the cost of undergrounding that Scottish and Southern Energy has suggested.
Biomass projects were not deliberately missed in the motion; biomass could be added to the list of renewables in which we could be involved and which could provide much local work and income.
Will the member give way?
Sorry. I am at the end of my speech.
Biomass projects were mentioned in the previous debate on renewable energy and could operate at a very local level. I hope that we can find a mechanism to do that.
Finally, as far as I am concerned, the DTI and the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets must not only give the north of Scotland the opportunity to produce schemes for local use, but allow us into the grid on favourable terms. We look forward to hearing what the Scottish Executive has to say on that issue.
I congratulate Maureen Macmillan on securing the debate. I recognise that the issue is extremely important, but I have not signed the motion. When Mary Scanlon and I discussed it, one or two aspects of it made us unsure whether we could support it. Nevertheless, I am prepared to support the motion in principle and discuss some aspects of it.
Looking at the issue as an outsider from the north-east, the first point to make is that if employment is to be generated through renewable energy in Scotland, the north-east would also like some. I ask the Highlands not to be too selfish in attracting such employment.
It is important to remember that huge inward investment in the Highlands has previously resulted in an economic boom for a while, but in disaster when the investment is withdrawn. I remember being told when I was at school about the aluminium smelter and the pulp mill. We have since seen the development of the fabrication yards, which are probably a key part of the Executive's strategy. They have also run on a boom and bust cycle over a considerable time.
When we consider the development of wind energy—onshore wind energy is currently the key element of renewables—I still think that the Conservative demand for a strategic policy from the Executive on where wind farms should be sited would be the key to the sustainable development of renewable energy in the Highlands at this early stage. I encourage the minister to consider giving that strategic guidance in the not too distant future.
Does Alex Johnstone agree with the SNP that part of that strategic approach should be for community benefit? Does he agree with the SNP that a far smaller amount of money should be paid to landowners for rental of the land and that that money would be put to far better use if it was paid to the communities by way of community benefit?
I do not think that the role of Government or Parliament is to lay down that kind of strict guideline. If genuine commercial benefit and economic advantage are to accrue, the opportunity should be taken to negotiate good deals for all the people who are involved. We should not dictate the balance at this stage.
In the limited time that is available to me I want to look further ahead. One of the pieces of information that I have been given is that if people think that the wind energy that is available in the Highlands is significant, wait until we find ways of harnessing the currents and tides up there. That is why I think that it is important that we plan infrastructure in such a way that it can be used not only for the wind energy that may be harvested in the next five or 10 years, but for the harvesting of sea currents in the longer term. We know that that would be beneficial and that it would be likely to produce more consistent and more regularly available energy.
It is important that the Executive should continue to foster the development of the next generation of environmentally based technologies. In recent weeks I criticised the intermediary technology institute in Aberdeen, because although we welcomed the institute's establishment there does not seem to have been much development.
We must learn from the fact that wind energy technology was developed in Scotland in its early stages but then exported to become a success in other countries. We must develop ways of effectively harnessing the wind and the sea currents in Scotland. Scottish companies must develop in the field, so that when the major fabrication yards of the Highlands become involved in constructing the devices that will be needed to produce that energy, Scottish companies—or companies that are partly Scottish—will place orders and reap the benefits in the long term. We must consider what happened with wind power and ensure that when we move on to other methods of generation, we maximise the benefit to the Scottish economy.
I am pleased that my colleague Eleanor Scott, member for the Highlands and Islands, managed to get here in time for the debate. She has been away all day on a toxic tour. We both congratulate Maureen Macmillan on securing the debate and welcome the cross-party support that the motion received. I think that all members recognise that renewables offer a major opportunity for Scottish businesses and will be good for the economy and the environment. That is the sort of growth that Greens like.
Members have acknowledged that many parts of Scotland have a skilled work force and suitable sites. Since the decline in the fortunes of North sea oil, those sites and work forces are operating at a fraction of their capacity. Many of the skills and techniques are highly transferable. The heavy engineering that was used to build and fit drilling rigs and production platforms could readily be turned to the manufacture of offshore wind, wave and tidal power devices and infrastructure. I was appalled to hear at this morning's briefing that some developers are bringing in—
Will the member give way?
I must make this point, which is important. Some developers often bring in their own riggers and cranes—they do not even hire Scottish cranes. We must address such issues.
Will the member give way?
I am sorry, but I do not have enough time.
Ocean Power Delivery Ltd built its prototype by using its skills and facilities, much of which came straight from the oil industry. However, it is a private company and if it does not receive the support and commitment of the Scottish Executive and the DTI, it will have to go to Portugal, where support exists. We cannot let that happen. Like Maureen Macmillan, I was pleased to learn that the Highlands-based firm, AWS Ocean Energy Ltd, is testing its machine. However, that testing is taking place in Portugal. We must ensure that the company is given all the support and assistance that it needs to bring the device back to Scotland for testing and commercial development. There are facilities in the Highlands and in north-east Scotland, but they will not be there for ever.
I feel for the work force at NOI Scotland Ltd in Fife. The workers have considerable expertise in making turbine blades, but they have been made redundant because of a lack of orders. They will have to watch the development of the nearby Clatto wind farm, knowing that they had no input into it.
We must give full support to a commitment to local content in planning applications. We gold-plate the procurement rules in a way that no other European country does. By supporting smaller, community-owned schemes we might encourage much more community content, which is the right approach.
I want to tell members about my visit to siGEN Ltd, which produces hydrogen fuel cells in Aberdeen, to see the company's model of the Unst project. I was impressed by the wind turbines, which were supplied by Provan Engineering Products Ltd. The turbines are small, but they have been designed to be sited downwind in a strong wind. As the wind strength increases, the spring-loaded blades move inwards and can keep turning in 75mph winds. That is ingenious—and it is Scottish ingenuity.
We have to consider appropriate and adequate funding. The climate change levy is a valuable tool in encouraging energy efficiency and promoting green energy. However, I am concerned that—although the levy raises almost £2 billion a year—it appears that the bulk of the money goes back across the board as a revenue-neutral device to reduce employers' national insurance contributions. Only £50 million is used to support the renewables industry and energy efficiency measures. Bearing in mind the huge economic gain that could result from the investment of that levy, I believe that much more of the money must be allocated to renewables. In addition, the remainder could be better targeted as an incentive to all households and businesses to reduce their energy demands.
I urge the Scottish Executive to discuss this issue with its colleagues at Westminster. Climate change is a major threat to us all. We need the income from the levy to be invested in the most productive areas.
I, too, welcome this evening's debate and I thank Maureen Macmillan for lodging the motion. Unlike others, I had no problem whatsoever in supporting it—because I recognise that the potential in the Highlands for jobs in fabrication and engineering is likely to be such that it will also benefit other areas, including my own. Members will be well aware of my interest in the support systems for renewable energy because of the fabrication yard at Methil in my constituency, which we are working to turn into a renewable energy business park. I look forward to the day—soon, I hope—when we can announce that that project is on its way.
I am slightly disappointed that Scottish Engineering has not been as proactive as it might have been in pushing the case for the engineering and fabrication jobs that will result from investment in renewable energy. I hope that the minister will take that point up in his next discussions with Scottish Engineering.
As well as the traditional welding, fabrication and engineering jobs, there will be opportunities in the further-from-market technologies—in the development of, and research into, better turbines, better blades and better gears that are made for the more hostile environments in which we will have to plant these things. There will also be opportunities in developing better diagnostic systems and equipment and in developing better maintenance systems. If a machine is out in 40m of very cold water, one does not want to be going out to it twice a week. One will want a machine that needs maintenance only once a month, with some faults being able to be fixed from the shore.
I would like the minister to consider—and perhaps he will refer to this in his summing up—sustaining the current system of renewables obligation certificates, because that system gives stability to the market and any tinkering with it would be a retrograde step. However, he should also consider the development of new support mechanisms to give comfort to firms when they are making investment decisions on particular initiatives or research projects. He should consider support for training—not only in engineering but in allied skills.
Picking up on an earlier point, I would ask the minister to consider community support for projects in renewable energy. At lunch time today, I had an interesting meeting with my fellow Labour and Co-operative Party MSPs at which we heard from representatives of Energy4All Ltd. They talked about their development of community businesses—in which communities took ownership of part or all of renewable energy facilities. That model—much more than direct Executive support for communities—is the one that we should follow. It helps communities to be sustainable in their own right, and to have a business in which they have a stake and which may return a capital gain to the area in 25 years' time.
I turn finally to the issue of local content, which is becoming more problematic as the number of applications for developments increases. I ask the minister, is his current review of planning legislation, to take account of the real strength of feeling that something could be done—within current European procurement and competition rules—to support that local content. Perhaps the definition of "local" could be broadened so that planning authorities can take account of an economic benefit that is wider than just the benefit to their own area. I urge the minister to give serious consideration to that.
Like earlier speakers, I congratulate Maureen Macmillan on bringing the debate to the Parliament.
As we have heard, there is little doubt that renewable energy offers Scotland major employment opportunities in manufacturing. There are already some 1,200 jobs in manufacturing and the construction industry that are related to operations around wind farms, and the development of new sources of renewable energy such as tidal and wave energy could create many more jobs. In that regard, there is a tremendous marine resource off the west coast that has yet to be tapped. However, we must ensure that in tapping such resources we do not inadvertently destroy other jobs. Although I do not belong to the luddite camp that believes that the tapping of resources will destroy the Highlands, I think that we need to be sensitive in how we tap resources and ensure that some special areas that are vital for tourism or which are genuine wildernesses are not developed in a manner that is unsympathetic to the natural environment.
The transmission problems that previous speakers have mentioned represent our biggest difficulty in advancing renewable technology. I want to raise the example of the proposed overhead power line from Beauly to Ullapool in my constituency. There are significant concerns because the pylons would follow a main tourist route and the communities that would be affected have strongly suggested that the visual impact would damage tourism. Those concerns must be taken seriously. If the power line is to be built, it must be shown that there is no practical alternative.
I believe that there are two possible alternative solutions that must be investigated before the Executive and Scottish and Southern Energy take the drastic step of allowing the pylons to be built. The first option is the development down the west coast of a major grid of sub-sea cables, which could tap into the area's vast power resources and deliver the power that is produced to the central belt. The second option is to stick with the route of the proposed overhead line, but to use underground direct current cabling. I am advised that such cabling can be buried without the need to create a motorway-wide excavation, which is what would be necessary for underground alternating current cabling.
An independent assessment should be carried out to compare the true cost of overhead transmission with the cost of underground transmission. Expert advice now suggests that it would be perfectly possible to transmit the power underground using direct current cabling and that that would cost considerably less than the proposed pylon line. We must question Scottish and Southern Energy's figures, which are being used at present.
Until the problems of transmission are resolved, I am sure that investors and developers will be reluctant to engage enthusiastically in a welcome and worthwhile initiative that will undoubtedly bring financial benefits to many of our rural communities.
I join other members in commending Maureen Macmillan for securing the debate and for the points that she and others have made, which I expect will contribute to the achievement of a valuable outcome.
I commend the work of the Highlands and Islands renewable energy group, which Jimmy Gray and Bill McAllister represented effectively today. They have shown a healthy national and local economic self-interest and are committed to maximising Highland, Scottish and United Kingdom added value in the sector. Their ambitions are to create local globally competitive companies, to learn the lessons of the past by creating a sustainable industry with sustainable jobs, to create a renewable research and development centre that is based north of the Highland line and to establish the Highlands as the marine and hydrogen capital of the world. Those are not shoddy ambitions; they are great, strong ones. However, Mr Gray and Mr McAllister are realists. They focused on the constraints, such as the availability and scope of the transmission line.
I pause to commend Councillor Jean Urquhart, who is calling for Norwegian experience to help in the investigation of the cost of underground transmission lines, which is entirely sensible.
Another constraint is public opinion—hearts and minds need to be won and the underground transmission line would go some way towards doing that.
The key point is the strength of the case behind Maureen Macmillan's motion. As she said, the facilities exist, we have a virtually unequalled, bottomless local reservoir of renewable energy sources, we have local skills and a strong work ethic and we have suitable transmission potential. The matter must be resolved. Community participation and benefit are strong and Highland Council has provided good leadership. It is self-evident that many people desire to live and work in the Highlands. There is enthusiasm among talented engineers to return to the area and do engineering work locally.
It is clear that HIREG has taken on a big burden. Sound progress has been made and the case for local content is compelling. There are good European and other role models to bolster HIREG's argument and, on today's showing, the people involved are highly motivated. However, they need help and support. HIREG's case is so strong that it could and should be at the heart of any national or pan-Highlands and Islands renewables strategy. UK and Scottish support is needed for the many stakeholders involved in HIREG. The list of real and potential stakeholders is impressive and includes the DTI, the Scottish Executive, the cross-party group in the Scottish Parliament on renewable energy, the Scottish Renewables Forum, Highland Council and other proactive local authorities, representatives of local communities, local, national and international manufacturing and engineering firms, the owners of the Nigg and Ardersier yards, UK and Scottish universities, venture capitalists, our Scottish banks, the oil and gas industry, Scottish Power and Scottish and Southern Energy. The list includes many people and organisations with vested interests.
I therefore ask the Scottish Executive to help to run a strategy planning event or events and to encourage the organisations that I named—all of them—to attend, through a plan to produce a product and services strategy that meets the objective of maximising national and local content and the gross value added that can be derived from the sector. No doubt that event would also help to inform and flesh out an overarching Executive strategy. With such pragmatism at that level, we would have a hope of identifying viable products and services and competitive roles and niches for Scottish suppliers. We would also have a mechanism through which that consolidated community could focus on carrying out the commercial analysis to identify clearly where the opportunities lie, find international partners and enable Scottish firms to succeed and compete through the huge opportunity that renewables present.
I was slightly surprised by the Green member's remarks about the decline of the oil industry because, with oil at more than $50 a barrel, the industry is doing pretty well at the moment. Maybe that was just wishful thinking on behalf of the Green party.
As an Argyll resident, I am fully aware of the importance to Campbeltown of the Vestas factory at Machrihanish. I am glad that the company's aim seems to be to make more turbines for the offshore wind farm industry. It is up to the Scottish Executive to find opportunities to facilitate more sites for offshore wind farms, which may take the pressure off some of the great beauty spots in Scotland. Such beauty spots might not be helped by having a wind farm on their doorstep because that would hurt tourism. A sensible compromise is needed and it is up to the Scottish Executive to work that out. After all, it is in a position to do so.
I agree with what John Farquhar Munro had to say about the importance of burying cables if possible. I know that underground cabling has been used a great deal in France. I am told that it can be as much as 30 times more expensive, but surely there is an opportunity for our industries to look into methods of burying the cables. That would be a clever thing to do.
One has to remember that all those wind farms have to be backed up by conventional methods of generation—one must never forget that fact. I would like to ask the minister whether, following the forestry debate that we had the other day, he will say a little bit more about the possibility of actually doing something about using biomass, rather than just talking about it.
I end by agreeing with Fergus Ewing's remark about the RSPB. I often cannot quite understand why the RSPB complains so much about the death of the occasional raptor when it seems to have no compassion whatsoever for the hundreds of small birds that the raptors kill.
I join other members who have spoken tonight in congratulating Maureen Macmillan on securing the debate. As you know, Presiding Officer, I delight in debating this subject and I, too, commend the Highlands and Islands renewable energy group and Amicus for their initiative to promote the development of renewable energy in the Highlands and Islands. Such initiatives make an important contribution to the development of renewable energy and to the achievement of our fairly ambitious renewables targets.
As the motion says, it is very important that as much benefit as possible from renewables development comes to local communities. I assure Maureen Macmillan and Christine May, with whom I discussed the issue recently, that HIE is working with companies to bring new firms to Nigg, to Arnish in Stornoway and to other fabrication yards across the Highlands, so that we can maximise the local community benefit. Of course, it is not possible for us to prescribe that developers should use only components that are manufactured locally. I understood that that would bring us into conflict with competition law. However, I have discussed the matter with Christine May and it is something that I am taking up with ministerial colleagues at Westminster, to see precisely what we can and cannot do to stimulate local procurement in that context.
What we can do, and are doing, is to facilitate engagement between developers and potential local suppliers, so that suppliers can be informed about what exactly developers are looking for and so that developers in turn can be made aware of the products and services that are on offer locally. That work is being led by Renewables UK, which is based in Scotland, and fully involves our enterprise networks, including, of course, Highlands and Islands Enterprise.
The Executive is also working with Renewables UK, with Scottish Development International, and with Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise to persuade overseas manufacturers and companies to establish facilities here in Scotland. There is a specific opportunity for Scotland in the area of marine renewables. That, as we all know, is a new industry. We have some of the best wave and tidal resources in the world here in Scotland—that has been mentioned by most members—and we must pull out all the stops to ensure not only that developers bring their devices to Scotland for testing but that they subsequently manufacture them in Scotland, too. I was therefore delighted to note that Isleburn, Mackay & Macleod, based at Evanton, announced last week that it has signed a joint deal with a Netherlands company, AWS, and that it will develop marine energy technology at Nigg. I reassure Shiona Baird that although the first prototype of the AWS machine has been tested in Portugal, the second prototype will be built, tested and, I hope, manufactured here in Scotland. That will represent Scotland overtaking Portugal.
I will be the first to congratulate the minister.
I thank Shiona Baird.
Isleburn, Mackay & Macleod is a good example of a Scottish manufacturing company that is already engaged in renewable energy. It was successful in its bid for part of a Vestas contract to produce monopiles and platforms for the Scroby sands offshore wind development to which Maureen Macmillan and others referred.
Groups such as HIREG also have an important part to play in energising companies in their area and bringing them together with developers, as Christine May said. In many ways, HIREG is a model that can be replicated in other parts of Scotland. In that context, I was interested in Jim Mather's speech.
On Vestas at Campbeltown, can the minister tell me whether there has been any progress in improving the pier facilities to allow more of the equipment to be carried by sea? Is anything happening regarding the Ballycastle to Campbeltown ferry, which could also be used by the industry?
I have of late been engaged with officials and with colleagues in other divisions—notably the transport division, which has an obvious interest in the matter—to ensure that the tendering process for the Ballycastle to Campbeltown ferry takes account of those factors. I look forward to commercial organisations that bid for that tender helping manufacturers such as Vestas in those areas.
We need to ensure that we make maximum use of the skilled engineering work force that is available in Scotland. That will bring with it the socioeconomic benefits to which Maureen Macmillan referred, not only in the Highlands and Islands—I understand the interests of the audience—but throughout Scotland.
I firmly believe that the policy that we have in place can deliver the benefits that Maureen Macmillan and others have talked about today. Developers and investors alike have reacted positively to the targets that we have set, and I have no doubt that the industry is set to grow considerably in the years ahead. We granted consent last month for two new major wind developments, which I announced in a debate in the Parliament. That is a strong signal that the potential for development and manufacturing in Scotland remains strong.
As I made clear during that debate, we are determined to support the development of as wide a range of renewable sources as possible, including wave and tidal power. We are investing seriously in offshore wind power. We are investing £3 million in the proposed deepwater demonstration turbines in the Moray firth, the components for which will, I hope, be largely manufactured in Scotland. If that project is successful, it could create hundreds of jobs over the coming years.
Our forum for renewable energy development in Scotland underpins the drive for economic development. It continues to produce results. In FREDS, the Executive, the renewables industry and academia work side by side to promote the renewables agenda, particularly the emerging technologies that I have described, and we have begun to implement the recommendations of the FREDS marine energy report. The report on biomass, which is probably better left to another night, will be published before the end of the year. I give Jamie McGrigor my commitment that I will carry on the work that I did with the Forestry Commission, among others, to promote biomass as a sound renewable energy source and to exploit its potential for creating employment in Scotland. FREDS is also working on recommendations for the development of the hydrogen economy and what needs to be done to improve training and skills in the renewables sector.
This short debate has offered another valuable opportunity—which I always welcome—to underline the importance of renewables for economic prosperity not only in the Highlands and Islands but throughout Scotland. I remain committed—as must we all—to supporting renewables, not least because they help to protect our environment for future generations. With regard to my new job, they create new jobs and economic activity and opportunity and lead Scotland towards a much more sustainable energy future. I have great pleasure in supporting the motion.
Meeting closed at 18:05.