Several of us have suggested amendments in the group that are important as they seek to strengthen the legislation. My two amendments in the group, amendments 108 and 141, seek to strengthen the framework by embedding independent scrutiny and reinforcing the role of co-operatives in building fairer local economies.

Amendment 108 proposes to introduce a requirement for a regular independent review of community wealth building. I think that it is proportionate to pick up the points that the minister made earlier. An external assessment would be carried out every five years, both of the national community wealth building statement and of a representative sample of local action plans. It will be absolutely critical to learn from both. The review must publish its findings and recommendations. Ministers can then set out how they intend to respond or explain why they are not taking action. That would mean that we would review the effectiveness of the legislation every five years. During every parliamentary session, we would have a proper review, which would inform what ministers are doing, support local authorities and support different community wealth building companies. I think that those reviews will be very important.

I thank Paul Sweeney for his support of my amendment 141. It would require ministers to report regularly on the steps that they are taking to promote co-operatives and support co-operative development. It asks for clarity on what practical support and resources, including financial support, have been made available, and how effective those measures have been. It is not enough for us to say that co-operatives are a “nice to have”. We have quite a lot of them, but we should think about where there are opportunities for more and what lessons can be learned. As a member of the Co-operative Party, I have seen some fantastic local co-ops, but we need to think about how we can get more of them and how we can support people to set them up and make them work.

I am a member of the Edinburgh Community Solar Co-operative, in my constituency, and I have seen the benefits of the investment as well as the benefits for the local council. We should be ensuring that co-ops are a core part of the community wealth building approach, as they provide models of ownership and control that keep wealth rooted locally. My amendment 141 would ensure that their promotion is not just incidental, but that it is properly monitored, reported on and taken seriously as part of delivering the bill’s aims.

I am trying to ensure that the bill’s aspirations work in practice. There are many good amendments in this group. I note that the minister has offered to discuss them with us before stage 3. I hope that my amendments will achieve cross-party support, because I think that they are proportionate and that they will help in the implementation and review of the bill.

That actually lets me come on to my supplementary question in an even better way than I had imagined.

Given your points about investing, ScotWind is a massive missed opportunity. The planned capital utilisation in 2025-6 reduced from £341 million to £153 million. Some of the money went into resource spending. Is it not a massive opportunity for us to invest in the sector? You have talked about the challenges, but only four out of the 29 companies that own ScotWind developers are headquartered in the United Kingdom. There are companies from other European countries, including Ireland, Sweden and Denmark, as well as regional Governments in Germany and Belgium, that own projects in ScotWind. Could we not take equity stakes and generate income?

You have started off by talking, quite rightly, about infrastructure, productivity and skills. If we made those projects deliver on fair work principles and support supply chain initiatives, would it not be a win-win all round? Is that something that you could advocate?

Last year, Future Economy Scotland carried out some work and basically said that it was a massive economic missed opportunity. We could just get on with taking those equity stakes and making profits, as well as building and using the supply chains and recruiting people.

On the amount that came in from ScotWind, I will park the question of whether we could get more income from it, and focus on the question of why we are not spending the money that is coming in from it.

I would like to see a detailed list from SNIB of the equity stakes that have been taken, because that is not in our briefing, and there is still that issue about not spending the money that has already come in—it is going elsewhere.

On the other thing that I wanted to finish with, you did not mention Berwick bank, and we have a huge opportunity—

My last point is about Berwick bank and the port of Leith. I will stop at this point, however, as that project is not happening yet.

That is a really powerful point—that statistic is shocking. If not Co-operative Development Scotland, what other organisation will do that work? We have lots of advocacy organisations, but what about an actual Government organisation that is there to deliver?

The amendments in this group are really important. My amendments 104 and 105 would strengthen the guidance provisions by ensuring that ministers must provide clear guidance, not just on the statement and action plans in general, but on all the measures that they contain. Amendment 104 would add a requirement that guidance must cover the community wealth building statement, including every measure that is set out under section 1(3). That would ensure that public bodies have clarity on how each element of the statement should be interpreted and implemented. Amendment 105 would do the same for local action plans, requiring guidance on all measures included under section 5(5). That would help to ensure consistency across local authorities and support effective delivery on the ground.

There is a key issue here about making the legislation successful. Guidance from ministers will be critical in supporting local authorities and community wealth building, whether for community-owned projects, small businesses or bigger companies.

I support amendment 69 in the name of Lorna Slater. It highlights community-owned renewable energy and the skills and supply chains where we are not seeing the development that we want to. Passing that amendment would help us.

I also support the minister’s amendment 106, which is about strengthening guidance and ensuring that local authorities and specified public bodies get the right guidance and the right support to implement the legislation.

Paul Sweeney spoke articulately in support of his amendments. I see that there is also an amendment from Richard Leonard. It strengthens the impact of public sector organisations in delivering on this important legislation.

There are two things to follow up on from that. First, you did not really address the issue about potentially taking equity stakes, which would involve using existing Scottish Government funding and having resources coming back in that you could reinvest, which would empower you to go further in terms of the decisions about your supply chains and where you get your manufacturing done.