Chamber and committees

Thank you, Presiding Officer.

We all recognise that we must take action on climate change. The energy sector is not just alive to the climate crisis; it is at the forefront of the low-carbon energy transition. Now, more than ever, we need the skills, expertise and innovation of the sector to help us to achieve net zero, yet the SNP-Green coalition, complicit with Labour, is determined to target it.

Meanwhile, thousands of hard-working people in the energy sector are getting on with the diversification to renewables that we need for net zero. It is high time that the SNP backed them—and the north-east—instead of its cosy coalition partners.

In the statement, the minister said that Scottish Government officials

“will work with stakeholders to ... analyse any lessons that should be learned.”

Given the lack of transparency around the agreement, can the minister confirm which stakeholders will be involved in the process and whether the findings will be shared fully and expeditiously with the Parliament and the wider public?

In the north-east, which is the region that I represent, the offshore oil and gas sector is worth more than £18 billion to the local economy. It supports 65,600 jobs. It might feel like groundhog day to Mr Ruskell, but a fair and managed transition to net zero is critical to those communities and their economic and emotional wellbeing.

The SNP-Green coalition spends a lot of time talking about a just transition, but it is becoming increasingly clear that it simply does not understand what that means. We need a responsible transition to net zero that takes existing energy demand into account, protects our energy security and safeguards the jobs of workers in carbon-intensive industries.

Last week, Patrick Harvie suggested that it was extreme to keep expanding oil and gas exploration in the North Sea. He seems to have succumbed to the fallacy that cutting off domestic supply means that demand for fossil fuels will disappear—and I will not take an intervention on that point. It will not disappear; instead, we will rely increasingly on imports from countries such as Russia and Qatar, losing thousands of jobs for no environmental gain. That is an odd position for the so-called Greens, when outsourcing oil and gas production overseas ignores the huge carbon footprint of doing so. Mr Ruskell might smile at me, but it is not funny.

LNG imports from abroad are far more carbon intensive than domestic energy production—more than twice as much. Let us be clear: in all UK Climate Change Committee scenarios, oil and gas accounts for between 47 per cent and 54 per cent of total cumulative energy demand between 2020 and 2050. All those scenarios are net zero compatible.

Let us not forget that the SNP made a second oil boom a central pillar of its economic policies for independence just a few years ago. “It’s Scotland’s oil”, they said. That is their narrative. Now, they have cost us the Cambo project and the 1,000 jobs that went with it. Astonishingly, the First Minister told MSPs that the new oil field should not be given the “green light”, even before the Scottish Government has completed a programme of work and analysis to understand Scotland’s energy requirements. How is that credible?

This is not a just transition. For a couple of headlines, the SNP and the Greens are recklessly pushing the oil and gas industry over a cliff edge, risking taking countless communities in the north-east with it. It is shameful.

Labour would be wise to listen to the GMB general secretary’s scathing criticism of the “cheerleaders for Cambo’s shutdown”. He said that they

“aren’t just throwing energy workers under the bus, but also our security of supply for the gas we will still need on the road to 2050.”

That was the GMB.

No, I am in my final few minutes.

The size of the vaccination workforce is pivotal to the delivery of the accelerated booster programme. The statement indicated the Scottish Government’s will to extend the number and role of volunteers. Is it possible for the First Minister to provide more details on how and when that is likely to be achieved?

It is a fact that the number of businesses in Scotland has dropped by almost 20,000 in a year, which is a devastating blow. Does the Scottish Government accept that it needs to do much more to help businesses—particularly small and medium-sized enterprises—to improve their digital capabilities and significantly expand support for upskilling and reskilling, which the Federation of Small Businesses has called for?

Does the member agree that the Scottish Labour position on Cambo has jeopardised a thousand jobs in the energy sector?

Will the minister welcome the United Kingdom Government’s investment in tidal energy?

Will Richard Lochhead give way?

I am in my final few paragraphs.

Let us not forget that it is the energy companies that are investing their money, time and technical expertise in renewable energy sources.

We all agree that we must work towards a more sustainable future, but our priority must be to secure a fair and managed transition to net zero for those people who rely on the energy sector for their livelihoods.

At decision time today, the Scottish Conservatives will support the SNP motion. We are sympathetic to the Labour amendment, but, if it was agreed to, it would remove our call for meaningful action. Given the findings in the Climate Change Committee’s report today, we feel that it is important to press that point. As such, we will not support the Labour amendment.

I move amendment S6M-02429.1, to insert at end:

“welcomes the UK Government’s North Sea Transition Deal, which will help to facilitate the reskilling of existing parts of the oil and gas workforce, and contains a commitment to joint investment with the energy sector of up to £16 billion by 2030 to reduce carbon emissions, and believes that discussions around a ‘just transition’ must lead to meaningful action to safeguard the jobs of tens of thousands of energy sector workers across Scotland, and particularly in the north east.”