How can we ramp up the importance of that issue? That will involve making companies and the public sector aware of their emissions that are linked to carbon consumption, but we also need to raise awareness among members of the public. People might want to recycle stuff or get things repaired, but they often have to bin practical items such as phones and printers. Sometimes, it is hard for the public to recycle even material waste, which would appear to be quite a low challenge. What are the target areas where we need to reduce our emissions and where the circular economy can help?

I start by drawing members’ attention to my entry in the register of members’ interests.

The SNP has now been in power for 18 years, and my constituents are being failed every day, whether that is failures in the NHS or the deepening housing emergency in Edinburgh. It is unacceptable that the First Minister was in complete denial about the housing emergency when we have 10,000 children who are homeless, as Mark Griffin pointed out.

We are also seeing a lack of action on the climate emergency. We need more investment to support the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service to tackle forest fires, and we need to support people to make their homes energy efficient and affordable. There is a lack of support for solar panels, there has not been action to fix the incredibly complicated process to enable people to get new heating options and there is a lack of action on affordable heat networks. Those failures are bad for people’s health and wellbeing. Those repeated failures to tackle the climate emergency mean that we are missing out on the thousands of green jobs that could be created right across our communities.

We have particular problems in the Lothians. Jackie Baillie made a powerful speech about the Scottish Government’s failures in the NHS. The Lothians will have 84 per cent of Scotland’s population growth over the next five years but NHS Lothian and the councils are underfunded. The integration joint board cuts that are being made now mean that essential services that keep people healthy are under threat. I raised that issue during oral questions last week and I got a disappointing answer from the minister. Our councils provided core funding for third sector groups, but really important services are now under threat, with services being reduced by £100 million in value in the past three years, partly through underfunding and partly because of unfunded increases in demand. Those services are not nice to have; they are essential in keeping people healthy.

Yesterday, I visited the Scottish Action for Mental Health Redhall walled garden, a therapeutic horticultural project for people who are struggling with mental health problems. It is now at risk of closure because there are plans to cancel the contract due to cuts in Government funding. That leaves highly vulnerable constituents with nowhere to turn, some of whom have been on waiting lists for referrals for well over a year. That will cost us all, because, if people’s mental health deteriorates, they will not be able to work. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care to acknowledge those challenges and to commit to working with NHS Lothian and the City of Edinburgh Council so that those essential services, which people rely on, are not lost.

We are not seeing the approach of investing in prevention that was highlighted by the Christie commission, and we are not getting the joined-up thinking that our constituents urgently need and deserve. That is really what motivates my member’s bill—the Wellbeing and Sustainable Development (Scotland) Bill. The issue is about more than public health; it is also about the climate emergency. The failure to act has left Scotland repeatedly missing our climate targets. Disruption to plans in relation to heat in buildings has affected supply chains and caused a lack of confidence among those who could be recruiting, expanding and investing in infrastructure to deliver the jobs right across Scotland that our communities urgently need.

The First Minister highlighted Grangemouth, but, as we argued last week, people knew for years that action was needed to save the jobs in that refinery. We need to learn lessons from other countries and deliver the jobs that are now highlighted in the willow review.

I will, briefly, yes.

Okay.

I welcome the action on Labour’s call for the abolition of peak rail fares, but we need joined-up transport planning and delivery for trains and buses, and we are not getting it. There are new homes in places such as Winchburgh, which should have had a railway station, for example, so if we do not get that joined-up planning, we are not getting the action that people urgently need after 18 years of failure. It is simply not good enough.

I will not make my intervention too long. I very much understand the concept of exporting hydrogen, but we have to build the infrastructure. Professor Jim Skea, who leads the Government’s Just Transition Commission, said that he did not see evidence to justify where the export markets are going to be. Have work and research now been done to look at the costs and the opportunities?

We need a constructive debate, because this will affect us right across the country. It is important in terms of our environmental and economic ambitions. It is about ensuring that we can develop opportunities now to deliver jobs and a sustainable and greener future tomorrow. It means action now. In the first two speeches, we have heard that the amount of research and technology development that is happening is an on-going issue.

The amendment that I have lodged is an add amendment—I did not do a delete-all-and-insert type of amendment. It is important that we work constructively together, but I wanted to emphasise the need for joined-up thinking, not just about the production of hydrogen but about how we use it. From talking to different sectors, I know that that is absolutely critical.

The UK Government’s recent announcement of 27 new hydrogen-powered projects across the UK under HAR2 should be celebrated, as 30 per cent of those projects are in Scotland. Projects such as those in Cromarty and Whitelee will produce green hydrogen, which will be used by local industry, transport and distilleries. We know that it can be made to work.

Scottish Labour is in full support of the expansion of green hydrogen projects in Scotland, as it is the most sustainable on-going opportunity for hydrogen projects. However, we need a clear strategy that links hydrogen to the green industrial strategy and the long-awaited energy strategy, which is why, in my amendment, I call on the Scottish Government—

Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?

There is an issue. It is not just about being ahead of the game but about learning from other countries. Lots of European countries have heat networks that are supplied by electricity. It is not just about inventing new tech; it is about learning from other countries and making that work where possible in our communities.

There is a hierarchy in maximising the lowest-carbon opportunities for hydrogen. I know that there is an argument for using blue hydrogen, which I will reflect on at the end of my contribution. However, most of my focus will be on green hydrogen. Blue hydrogen potentially has a place, but it is CO₂ emitting so the carbon capture and storage aspects would need to be pulled together. The solution will be to pursue the most effective low-carbon opportunities, and that is what I will focus on.

Our strategy must address how we intend to use the green hydrogen that we will produce in Scotland. Reference has already been made to transport. We can potentially use green hydrogen for various types of transport. Buses do so already. There are also opportunities in the rail and heavy goods vehicles sectors, but those would need a joined-up approach. We must consider which sectors we can work with, and we need to get the regulations right for private companies. There are huge numbers of opportunities. As I flagged in my response to yesterday’s statement on Grangemouth, sustainable aviation fuel must be part of the mix, too.

Given what is happening at Grangemouth, we should consider the implementation of the project willow report, which highlights the need for action and investment now. We must form links to potential opportunities for using green hydrogen and to sustainable aviation fuel, which takes us back to transport. We must examine the various types of transport and decide where the various fuel types could be used most appropriately as changes emerge over the next couple of decades.

The RWE project at Grangemouth is really important, so we must ensure that its work, together with that on project willow and the Just Transition Commission’s report from two years ago, will be acted on. Our approach should not be to wait until something bad happens but to plan ahead.

Can I just keep going on this point?

The key factor about the situation at Grangemouth is that it is not just about increasing the supply of green hydrogen; we also need the demand and the market to supply it to. That involves encouraging industry growth in the private sector, as well as exploring how public investment could unlock existing opportunities, and linking them with our key renewable energy sources.

I am keen to see our Governments working together. I noted the positive aspects of the cabinet secretary’s speech. We need a clear approach to new onshore and offshore wind resources to ensure that the electricity that we will generate across our homes, our transport and our economy will be used where we need it. We are already seeing the development of pumped hydro storage and battery storage, so factoring in how we will supply electricity to deliver green hydrogen will be key. Last year, constraint payments made to wind farm operators reached the level of £380 million for curtailing 4.3 terawatt hours of wind energy. That is bonkers, and it is why I am articulating the need for a joined-up approach.

Hydrogen production could use that extra electricity, lead to lower network costs and help to bring down bills for individuals and businesses. However, we must also ensure that we have the grid capacity to supply that electricity where it is needed. Where sites are due to be developed for green hydrogen, we must ensure that they have electricity supplies.

Earlier in the debate, members discussed where we can do that, but we must also do it for our industrial and transport sectors. I mentioned buses, transport, rail and heavy goods vehicles. We must decide the locations across the country where the best opportunities sit. The Scottish Government needs to do some work on thinking strategically about locations, and we must consider how we prioritise the opportunities. As we look to the future, it is clear that green hydrogen will be a cornerstone of Scotland’s renewable energy strategy, which just needs to be joined up. We have had a long history of project commitments, but we have not always seen them being delivered.

If we are to meet our climate targets, support new jobs and see economic development across the country, we need a strategy that maximises the use of our natural resources but also develops industrial sites that could deliver on those opportunities. By investing in cutting-edge technology, we can drive innovation, foster economic growth and protect our planet for future generations. We all need to work together across the parties, but we must also see our Governments doing so. By that I mean not only our UK and Scottish Governments; we need to bring local government in, and think about planning, the supply chains and transport connectivity.

I hope that members will support Scottish Labour’s amendment. It aims to be constructive and to ensure that we have a joined-up approach to production, supply and use of hydrogen where it makes most sense, which potentially ticks our climate boxes, creates new jobs and supports our economy. If there were to be support across the chamber I hope that that would give confidence to new investors. It might not be 100 per cent—that would be impossible to achieve in here—but at least there could be positive support for ensuring that we maximise the opportunities in Scotland and get on with them.

I move amendment S6M-17399.3, to insert at end

“; further calls on the Scottish Government to ensure that clear, strategic plans for hydrogen infrastructure are included in its long-awaited energy strategy, and calls on the Scottish Government to deliver joined-up thinking on how to maximise the low-carbon opportunities and efficient usage of hydrogen.”