Climate Action and Energy, and Transport
Good afternoon. The next item of business is portfolio question time, and the portfolio is climate action and energy, and transport.
30th United Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties
To ask the Scottish Government, in relation to its climate policies, what it hopes to achieve through its representation at COP30 in Brazil. (S6O-05179)
The Scottish Government’s representation at COP30 delivered on our programme for government commitment to lead on climate action internationally. At COP30, I pressed for the scaling up of quality finance to meet the needs of the most vulnerable; advocated for greater recognition of states, regions and devolved Governments in global climate processes through Scotland’s leadership roles as president of Regions4 and a co-chair of the Under2 Coalition; and confirmed funding for loss and damage, human rights and adaptation projects as part of the £36 million climate justice fund. I also showcased our climate justice and loss and damage programming, ensuring that the voices of the global south were amplified.
I welcome the Scottish Government’s funding for loss and damage, human rights and adaptation projects, which were announced at COP30 last week, and the continued commitment to climate justice and action. Can the cabinet secretary say any more about the Scottish Government’s domestic work to reach net zero, including through the recently published draft climate change plan?
I thank Rona Mackay for giving that context. Our climate change plan is very important when we represent internationally what we do and share our thoughts on how we can all decarbonise. Our plan sets out 150 actions across transport, buildings and agriculture that are aimed at meeting Scotland’s carbon budgets while supporting people to make and adjust to the changes that are required.
The plan introduces new measures to accelerate the transition to electric vehicles, electrify industry and reduce emissions while making Scottish industry more competitive. The plan also describes how we will ensure that the opportunities that net zero presents for new jobs and economic growth, better infrastructure and energy security, cleaner air and improved public services are seized and fairly distributed as part of a just transition.
Can the cabinet secretary confirm whether she flew business class to Brazil and the total cost of the trip for her and her officials? Can she explain why that money would not have been better spent on constituents who are seeing their communities ruined by monster pylons and battery storage?
A Government does international engagement as a matter of course. It is very important that every Government—whether it is a devolved Government in Scotland, the UK Government or any other Government—engages with international partners on items of great importance. Climate change is a global emergency and it requires an international response.
Douglas Lumsden knows that every Government will have expenses associated with any international travel, and he knows how to find out my expenses for that trip.
Clyde Metro Proposals
To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update regarding plans for the proposed Clyde metro. (S6O-05180)
The on-going stage of the development process for Clyde metro, known as the case for investment, is being led by Strathclyde Partnership for Transport. It is being supported by Glasgow City Council, with Transport Scotland providing a project assurance role. That key stage, which will inform decisions around network selection, phasing and implementation, is well under way and is anticipated to be complete in 2027.
The cabinet secretary will be aware that one of the proposals for Clyde metro is to have a rail link from Glasgow airport through Paisley Gilmour Street station. Given that Paisley Gilmour Street is one of the busiest stations in Scotland, does she not agree that having that link would make the entire project more viable and offer economic success for the town of Paisley? Does the cabinet secretary agree that the station would be one of the more important parts of the Clyde metro, as it is smack in the centre of the universe of Paisley?
The on-going stage of the development process for the Clyde metro will inform decisions on network selection, phasing, implementation and funding. I confirm to George Adam that the work includes consideration of access improvements to Glasgow airport by public transport. I am sure that he will make representations to Strathclyde Partnership for Transport on the case for links to Paisley Gilmour Street as part of that process.
The Clyde metro is a transformational project. It would address the gaps that he has identified in public transport provision in the region and make sure that there is connectivity between sectors of education, employment, leisure and tourism, and it is clear that Paisley is one of the key areas that need to be connected. However, as I set out, it is SPT’s role to develop those network selections.
Does the cabinet secretary agree that the fragmentation of control between the Scottish Government and the regional transport partnership militates against efficiency, when compared to other jurisdictions that have delivered metro rail very efficiently, such as Madrid? For example, the advanced manufacturing innovation district Scotland—AMIDS—south project in Paisley cannot consider very light rail in order to get a quick win with a shuttle train between the airport terminal and Paisley Gilmour Street because of the lack of span of control between rail and road, and because road projects always take priority by default.
It is open to Transport Scotland to work with SPT on all those connectivity issues at the request of SPT. I am sure that Paul Sweeney will make those representations to Strathclyde Partnership for Transport as it sets out the network selections and connections. If he is saying that we should centralise all the decision making over transport in Scotland, I am not sure that that would be good, but synergy between rail and road and other forms of public transport, as has been set out in the options for Clyde metro, would make sense. I encourage everyone to look at the issue from a place-based perspective.
I agree with the cabinet secretary that the Clyde metro could be transformational, but we need to see more detail. She mentions that there could be some kind of update by 2027. Will that provide more detail on what routes there might be and the kind of transport that would be on them?
The case for change, which strengthens the rationale for Clyde metro, will be set out with a vision and objectives. The development of potential network options to address problems and opportunities will also be identified in the case for change, as well as the emerging shortlist of network options, which is what Graham Simpson is asking for. Those will be taken forward for further development. That will all be considered along with the potential modes for Clyde metro, including bus rapid transit, tram, tram-train and metro, which also relates to the question that Paul Sweeney asked.
Climate Change Impacts (Nature-based Solutions)
To ask the Scottish Government how it is supporting communities and local authorities to adapt to the impacts of climate change, including through nature-based solutions. (S6O-05181)
Nature is one of the best tools that we have to adapt to the impacts of climate change. Nature can support our physical and mental health, cool our urban areas in summer and, critically, protect our places from heavy rain and floods.
Scottish Government funding streams such as the £65 million nature restoration fund, the water environment fund, our network of climate action hubs and practical resources from NatureScot and Adaptation Scotland support the huge efforts of community groups and local authorities, which are already delivering those nature-based solutions on the ground.
A recent poll by the MCS Foundation found that although more than a third of Scots do not feel informed about what action is being taken to meet their climate targets, a clear majority still see climate action as important, with 66 per cent of people saying that they would replace their current fossil fuel boiler to help tackle climate change. The Government’s existing support, including Home Energy Scotland’s advice service and the roll-out of local heat and energy efficiency strategies, already helps individuals and local communities to make the right decisions about how to decarbonise their home heating.
Will the cabinet secretary say more about the differences that those services are making and confirm the Government’s continued commitment to delivering a national advice service so that households can make well-informed and confident choices about the future of heating their homes?
I am pleased that David Torrance highlights the local heat and energy efficiency strategies and Home Energy Scotland. It is absolutely the duty of a local MSP to highlight the support services that are available to allow households to decarbonise. It is crucial that we help people to make informed, positive climate choices. Councils have completed their first round of local heat and energy efficiency strategies, which help to set out likely solutions across Scotland. The right solution in each case is dependent on individual properties and choices, and those choices need to be informed and made with advice.
Our Home Energy Scotland advice service continues to support thousands of households annually with free bespoke and impartial advice to make their homes easier, cheaper and greener to heat. The service also points people to sources of grant support, including the warmer homes Scotland scheme and the Home Energy Scotland grant and loan schemes.
Question 4 has not been lodged.
Energy Infrastructure (Domestic Supply Chain)
I apologise to the chamber for my late arrival—I had not realised that the timetable had changed.
To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to support the growth of the domestic supply chain for energy infrastructure. (S6O-05183)
We are directly supporting the sector through the just transition fund and our commitment to invest up to £500 million over five years in offshore wind infrastructure and manufacturing. That includes support for projects such as those involving Maritime Developments, Verlume and Sumitomo’s cable factory. We are also supporting ports across Scotland—including at Ardersier and Kishorn—which are critical to the deployment of all those projects. Over the past 18 months, we have invested almost £150 million and have leveraged about £740 million of wider investment into 10 projects, which have the potential to support about 5,000 jobs across Scotland. That is just the start—we have seen that port developments can support hundreds more jobs indirectly.
If we are to make the most of the economic opportunities that come with modernising and expanding our energy infrastructure, having a strong domestic supply chain is vital. We are already hearing warnings from across the sector that, due to a lack of domestic manufacturing capacity, it risks missing out on tens of billions of pounds of inward investment. However, we are still not even close to providing enough college and apprenticeship places to meet the demand for engineers, technicians and those with other trades that those sectors are desperate to recruit in order to build that capacity. In fact, many places for such courses are being cut because of financial pressure. Does the cabinet secretary recognise that, without a skilled workforce, we cannot possibly hope to reap the benefits that would come from modernising our energy infrastructure and that cutting places is the absolute worst thing that we could be doing?
I am glad to hear Brian Whittle focus on the economic opportunities that are associated with energy infrastructure. He makes very good points that are often missed by his colleagues about the economic importance of that.
A source of great dismay to me has been that there are no local conditions as part of the National Energy System Operator’s procurement of an energy and electricity upgrade system. I have written to the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero about that issue. When we did our ScotWind round, we made sure that there were local procurement and local content provisions within the conditions. Doing so meant that the economic growth would stay in Scotland. We have also recently invested in a programme of offshore wind skills training provision, and we recently opened the offshore wind skills hub in the city of Aberdeen.
Question 6 has been withdrawn.
United Kingdom Railways Bill
To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the outcome of its discussions with the UK Government regarding its Railways Bill. (S6O-05185)
The UK Government’s Railways Bill has, as we understand it, been informed by the success of the Scottish Government’s policy of integrated management of track and train in Scotland’s railway. Our preferred policy position remains that it is in Scotland’s best interests for rail powers to be devolved fully. However, we support the bill’s policy intent, as it seeks to maximise the benefits of greater rail industry integration while respecting current devolved responsibilities. The bill will allow the Scottish Government to have greater accountability for rail infrastructure, reflecting the significant financial investment that we make. It will also give the Scottish ministers new powers to give directions and guidance to Great British railways on Scottish railway activities.
Although we are supportive of the bill, it will be subject to further scrutiny, including through the Scottish Parliament’s legislative consent process, which we are now going through. Further updates will be provided in due course.
Despite the majority of funding for Scotland’s railways coming from the Scottish Government, not all aspects of them are fully accountable to the Scottish Parliament. The cabinet secretary addressed that point in her initial response. The bill will not alter the fundamental reality of that.
The Scottish National Party has shown what can be achieved when decisions about Scotland’s railways are taken in Scotland. Notwithstanding what the cabinet secretary has already said, does she agree that, despite the UK Government’s current position, the bill provides a major opportunity to devolve powers over Scotland’s railways fully into the control of this Parliament and Government and to let us get on with the job of running the best railways in the UK?
In Scotland, public ownership by the SNP Government has created the opportunity to deliver a railway that is truly run for the benefit of passengers, our communities and our businesses. Our approach is widely admired and even envied elsewhere in Great Britain. Our counterparts in Wales and the north of England want to follow the success of our devolved model, which has resulted in consistently higher passenger satisfaction in ScotRail train performance than the GB average.
It remains our strong position that the best policy is to devolve rail powers fully, which would enable us to build on success and would reflect the level of funding that we provide to Scotland’s railway—more than £1.5 billion this year. However, within the limitations of the bill, I have secured greater ministerial powers of direction for the aspects of rail that we fund and set strategy for.
Proposals in the Railways Bill would require the UK Secretary of State for Transport to set an overall target of a 75 per cent increase in the amount of freight moved by rail by 2050. I am keen to understand what engagement the cabinet secretary has had with the UK Government on rail freight. Does she agree that maintaining open access for rail freight companies is the best way to ensure that goods can be moved more effectively across Scotland?
As part of the bill’s development, I have had extensive discussions in person with Lord Hendy, the rail minister, and the secretary of state, Heidi Alexander. Issues of cross-border travel are part of continuing discussions—intercity travel and freight are essential parts of rail development, as are aspects of access. The issue of open access is critical to the UK Government’s decision making. We have set out in our strategy and our high-level output specification that freight is essential. I am pleased to see that the UK Government has copied that and reflected in its position the need to increase rail freight. That is encouraging, but, until rail powers are fully devolved, we will always have to protect Scotland’s interests in our on-going discussions with the UK Government.
It would seem that the UK Government takes a more positive approach, because the Railways Bill’s policy documentation says that all three Governments—UK, Scottish and Welsh—support the reforms and will continue to work together to deliver benefits. I urge the Scottish Government to work co-operatively on the bill, and I am encouraged to learn that work is being done on a memorandum of understanding between our two Governments.
The issue of freight has already been raised. What benefits can the cabinet secretary see from the Railways Bill in relation to increased partnership working between Transport Scotland and Great British rail?
The bill will give ministers control and direction over railways in Scotland. That includes the infrastructure that is currently under Network Rail and the infrastructure that we have in public ownership in relation to ScotRail and the Caledonian Sleeper.
I have had numerous extensive discussions with the UK Government, and those discussions continue. I am co-operating extremely well—I am sure that the UK Government would acknowledge that. However, I have been absolutely clear, as I was in the Parliament during our debate, that there is no way in which I would countenance any diminution of our devolved responsibilities.
We have to chart a way forward, and the bill is part of that. Claire Baker referred to the memorandum of understanding, which will be critical for the issues relating to rail freight, as set out by Sue Webber, and other matters. The bill includes aspects that, currently, we would be asked about or consulted on by the secretary of state. The situation will be reversed for some issues—for example, we will set the strategy for rail freight—but we will reflect and consult with the secretary of state on other matters. Therefore, in some instances, the roles will be reversed, and good co-operation and understanding will be required.
Although I support the bill, as I have said, we will have to go through the legislative consent memorandum process. Of the 90-odd sections of the bill, 27 will affect Scotland, so that is an extensive piece of work that will go to the committee. I hope that the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government can work constructively with the UK Government to ensure that we get the best result for Scotland. Full devolution would be the best result, but, short of that, I think that we can work with the bill.
Draft Climate Change Plan 2026 to 2040
To ask the Scottish Government what progress it is making in discussing Scotland’s draft climate change plan 2026 to 2040 with stakeholders and MSPs. (S6O-05186)
I wrote to the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, the Climate Change Committee, the United Kingdom Government, environmental non-governmental organisations, the Just Transition Commission and business and third sector groups to inform them of the draft plan’s publication. A public consultation on the plan is now open on the Government’s website, and we will hold public engagement activities to make it as active and inclusive as possible. We will also continue to convene the climate change plan advisory group to gather expert views and will continue to engage with members of the Scottish Parliament throughout the consultation period.
I have offered meetings to the NZET Committee’s convener and to numerous MSPs—those invitations went out in the past couple of days—and my door remains open for anyone across the chamber to engage on the draft plan. I certainly include Monica Lennon in that if she wants to discuss the plan with me.
I am grateful to the cabinet secretary for that welcome update. Organisations across the energy, manufacturing and housing sectors are expected to deliver the clean heat ambitions that are set out in the draft climate change plan, but many are saying that they cannot plan properly for the scale of the challenge, especially now that the heat in buildings bill has been kicked down the road until after the election.
I recognise the wider engagement that the cabinet secretary has carried out, and I welcome her offer today. What can she say to stakeholders who think that there is a lack of certainty and who want that effective engagement to continue?
I refer Monica Lennon and anyone from those sectors to the statement that was made by my colleague Màiri McAllan. She gave some of the reasons why she thought that it was best to publish a draft heat in buildings bill in this parliamentary session, but she could not make a commitment to get the bill through by the end of the parliamentary session because we do not have certainty about the UK Government’s warm homes plan or the electricity and gas pricing arrangements. That information is critical when it comes to taking a view on the measures that we can take, because the price of electricity is fundamental to the plans for decarbonisation of heat in Scotland. I refer Monica Lennon and anyone else who wants details on that to the statement that Ms McAllan made on Tuesday.
The draft bill is out for consultation. It is available for people to see, and the certainty on it and the trajectory are there for people to see. Ms McAllan was certain that she wanted to give that certainty.
Scotland will fail to meet its target to reduce food waste by one third by this year. In 2019, the Scottish Government said that it would deliver sustained communication to drive change. Unfortunately, that change was to increase food waste. What work is on-going to engage consumers and businesses to deliver behaviour change?
Maurice Golden will be aware that we have a circular economy route map, which has been worked on with the involvement of local authorities. We are working with them to reduce food waste, in particular, across the 32 local authorities. We are also working closely with my colleagues in the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities on that. I can signpost Maurice Golden to the more recent circular economy announcements about the publishing of the route map and the results of the engagement work that has been undertaken as a result of the Circular Economy (Scotland) Act 2024.
Previous
Pancreatic Cancer AwarenessNext
Offshore Wind