Chamber and committees

Finally, I will move on to the issue of jobs and skills in the renewable energy sector. Yesterday, in the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee’s session on the budget, the cabinet secretary Michael Matheson talked about the opportunities in that sector, and I questioned him specifically about hydrogen. He said that the constraints in the renewable energy sector are largely to do with the availability of labour—we know that there are real pressures on that—as well as planning consents and skills.

In a tight labour market, it is important to be able to transfer the skills that we have already. Looking at the budget lines, however, and the pressures in this portfolio, Scottish Enterprise now has a clear emphasis on the issue and finally has hydrogen as one of the key sectors. There is also a big focus on inward investment. If all the funding is focused on inward investment, how can we ensure that domestic companies are being supported in relation to jobs and manufacturing? It would be helpful if you could go through that.

We had an inspiring and refreshing session with the chief entrepreneurial adviser last week; he is very formidable indeed. To what extent will his remit allow him to engage with other Government departments and with public bodies?

He raised the specific issue of intellectual property ownership in universities and how that might preclude the development of entrepreneurship. For example, the Scottish Funding Council might want to reward and stimulate start-ups from universities, and there might be a bit of a conflict in that regard. What range and role does the chief entrepreneur have with public bodies and Government departments?

Good morning. It is clear that the tourism sector provides sustainable economic growth across Scotland. We know that the sector is under particular pressure for lots of reasons, but we also know that spending by international visitors is one of the areas that can help the sector to recover. The committee previously expressed the view that support should be given to VisitScotland—in particular, for its international marketing. VisitScotland’s budget was £65 million in 2021-22 and is proposed to be £49 million in 2023-24, which is a 2.7 per cent reduction since last year. The response from the Scottish Government to our request simply said:

“The VisitScotland Board will fully consider scenarios that will enable them to successfully carry out their marketing activity in light of the Scottish Budget.”

That does not really leave us with much comfort.

Universities are independent institutions, of course, but I suppose that it depends on what the Scottish Funding Council, as funders, might do. Are we open to thinking about things where we come across them? That is a challenge that we have repeatedly had.

I politely point out that that was happening in 2021-22, and that the shift in that regard probably took place about five years ago. I agree, though, that VisitScotland is very effective with its marketing spend.

I will move on to another area, which is the need for Scotland to improve its productivity rate. It is great that the gap between Scotland and the UK on that has been closed, but recruitment and retention are key issues, particularly in the current labour market. The programme for government mentions support and funding for a pilot of a four-day working week. Where is the funding support for that in the coming year, and what is your view on the policy going forward? We are about to see the results of a UK-wide pilot, which I think will be positive. I do not want the Scottish Government to fall behind on that agenda.

I move on to the climate emergency skills action plan. You have been generous with your time, so short answers will suffice. Is the refreshed plan on course to be published in 2023, as per the NSET delivery plans? How will the refresh interact with the on-going review of Scotland’s skills landscape, which is being led by James Withers?

Good morning, cabinet secretary. I am aware and appreciate that, compared with other portfolios, your budget is more subject to market conditions that are outwith your control.

Bearing in mind my previous remarks that market conditions have more of an impact on your portfolio than others, and sticking on green hydrogen, one issue is how we in Scotland benefit from the potential jobs. Will your budget be allocated for attracting inward investment, depending on market conditions—obviously, we have European and other competition—or will you allocate funding to help Scotland-based companies to produce hydrogen in order to secure jobs as part of the just transition from the traditional energy sector?

That is very helpful for the wider context of the committee’s work.

My final question is on budget. Given green hydrogen production’s reliance on offshore and onshore wind, is it fair to say that spending on the enablers for your hydrogen strategy to be effective is not within your budget? The prohibitors could be skills, planning consent—as you have talked about—and domestic company development, so that Scottish companies can develop capacity. Those areas lie in the economy portfolio. What confidence do you have that the priorities are there for that spend to enable the energy generation that we have talked about? I suspect that those budgets are under more pressure than your budget.

I also have a question about the national energy agency from a budget point of view. Will new funding be made available to finance that agency or will funding be top-sliced from other dedicated heat and energy efficiency funding programmes?