Chamber and committees

I thank Jamie Halcro Johnston for securing this debate. First, let me put on the record that I am the owner of a very old property that benefits from a wood-burning stove, which provides highly effective space heating and helps to prevent condensation, mould and damp. It has been a game changer for the gable wall of my house. It has also helped us to heat our sandstone home during periods of loss of power, and I know that, during a prolonged period without mains power, it would enable us to heat water and cook food. It has also given us a degree of control during the period of volatile energy prices over the past two winters.

All that said, I am very aware that the recently published new build heat standard would not, in fact, have prevented someone who had the same house type as me—an older existing property—from installing a stove. However, I am also aware that the Scottish Government has recently consulted on creating a pathway to 2045, which could require those purchasing a home or business premises to end their use of polluting heating systems within a fixed period following the completion of the sale. I assume that that would include direct emission heat sources, such as stoves and boilers, potentially leaving many homes such as mine, built in the 1800s, with poorer heating outcomes.

We all need to play our part in reaching net zero, and that will include radically rethinking many of our ways of working and living. However, we need to take into account variations in geography, topography, grid connection and capacity and, conversely, our increasingly volatile climate. We need to think about that, because our climate is increasingly volatile and we must ensure that what we do does not exacerbate that.

There is no doubt that the burning of fossil fuels contributes to climate change and that addressing that via legislation is necessary. However, I also understand, as the MSP for the large and predominantly rural Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley constituency, that grid connections can be tenuous for outlying rural communities and isolated farms and cottages and that the stopgap for many of those, for heating and eating, is a wood-burning stove. During the horrendous weather event known as the beast from the east back in 2018, many folk in my area were snowed in for weeks and relied heavily on their stoves. That was not just a power cut for a couple of hours—it lasted for weeks. People who live in rural properties or properties that are remote from the grid infrastructure would still have a need for wood-burning stoves in such emergency situations, and those cannot be portable—they need to be fixed.

I understand that the new build heat standard made some provision for such emergency situations, but, as we have heard, I and many others felt that that was a bit vague and open to local interpretation, so I am keen to hear from the minister exactly how a house builder is able to demonstrate the need for a stove, because, in my mind, that need is almost a given in rural settings.

I have a degree of sympathy with the arguments that burning dried wood from sustainable sources in a modern efficient stove or boiler has a lower carbon emission calculation than some grid resources, and we need to remember that. Indeed, many crofters and those living in rural areas have factored access to sustainable forestry for energy provision into their way of life. We must ensure that we do not exacerbate fuel poverty in any way. I am glad that the minister has taken our collective concern seriously and is urgently reviewing the standard, and I am keen to hear from her on that when she winds up the debate.

It is really important that we start to break down silos in this Parliament. Perhaps if the standard had come to the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee for consideration, we would have been able to flag up those concerns. I take on board the fact that Miles Briggs did that in the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee, but we need to square that circle a bit.

I am keen to bring to the minister’s attention the plight of one of my constituents, who raised an issue in light of this debate. She recently had a wood burner installed but found out only when it was later inspected by a Heating Equipment Testing and Approval Scheme engineer that it was dangerous. She is very concerned about the lack of regulation for stove installation in Scotland and has asked that the Scottish Government considers changes to legislation to allow stove fitting to be carried out only by installers who are accredited by HETAS. If we are going to make changes and ensure that there is a place for stoves in the future, we could look at that type of accreditation.

Thank you.

Good morning, minister. The Scottish Animal Welfare Commission concluded that

“a dog bred for racing in Scotland currently has poorer welfare than the average of other dogs in the population.”

I want to focus on that for a little while. The report refers to how they are bred, how they are reared, trained and raced, and indeed how they are retired if they get to that point, or how they might end their lives by being put down. It also talks about the issue of wastage within the industry. Does the Scottish Government agree with the overall conclusion that dogs that are bred for greyhound racing have a poorer standard of welfare throughout their lives?

On the assertion about them being pets, I think this is where we get a bit confused about how the tracks operate in two different places. We have the issue with GBGB tracks that the animals must be kept in kennels; they cannot be part of a family set-up. I am not so sure if that works for dogs that are raced at the only track that we currently have in Scotland. I do not know whether they are able to be part of the family or whether they have to be kennelled and not kept as part of the family as a pet in order to race. That is where it gets a bit confusing for us in trying to unpick the differences between here and England.

Some of the things that I was going to ask about have already been picked up on. Could the 2021 statutory animal licensing framework be extended to include greyhound racing and could there be a licensing approach that might address some of our concerns? With my former local authority hat on, I wonder what the implications would be for local government if that were to be extended. My plea, I guess, is that Government actively looks at that matter and at ensuring that any regulations that come forward are considered by the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and licensing officers and that their concerns are taken into account. Is this one of the only ways in which we can have more regulation in this area, given the crossover impact of people in Scotland racing their dogs in England?

I understand the distinction that needs to be made, but following on from my colleague Emma Roddick’s point, we are taking evidence in this place on breeders who have 40 dogs in kennels in Scotland and are racing them in tracks in England. The welfare of those dogs is of paramount concern to this committee and indeed the petitioners. It comes back to the 2006 act and the balancing out of what is the acceptable level of harm that may come to those dogs and what are the welfare concerns. I do not know whether you have any points to come back on.

Yes. Further to what the convener was asking about, is the Government considering extending the licensing requirements to include greyhound racing? We know that people were evenly split down the middle in the consultation, but does this approach provide us with a way of starting to address some of the issues, if indeed the member’s bill does not reach its conclusion?

Although I fully appreciate the broader intention behind NPF4’s energy policy principles and our move towards a just transition, many of my constituents have brought to my attention the cumulative effect of a high volume of wind farms, such as the five that are proposed in the north Carrick area alone, with turbine heights in excess of 200m. Can the cabinet secretary explain how NPF4 allows my constituents to raise the impact that that might have on their communities, their amenities, private water supplies and, indeed, local biodiversity? How can we ensure that local voices are heard?

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the net zero secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding any plans to review any unintended impacts of the fourth national planning framework on energy policy. (S6O-03457)

[Made a request to intervene.]