It is simply not happening, though. We need a push to make it happen and to kick the issue up the agenda. If organisations do not see that role as an immediate part of the day job, who is going to do it?

All public sector organisations are under pressure. One group that I have not mentioned so far that would be covered by my proposed bill is local authorities. We know that they are under pressure, and my bill would help by giving them support and advice and helping them to share best practice. It would also provide focus, because it would mean that there could be an investigation if it was clear that clearly defined legislation was not being implemented. It is about going beyond thinking about the issue as a nice to have or thinking, “We’ve legislated on this, so we tick the box and move on.” The scrutiny is not happening in real life.

Pressure on committees is definitely an issue. They need expertise and support, as we can see when committees appoint experts for short pieces of work in addition to the Scottish Parliament information centre’s capacity. We could increase that capacity through annual reporting, so that commissioners report to specific committees. A commissioner would have an expectation of which committee it might report to, but it might have done work in one year that relates more to another committee than the one to which it previously reported, so that would be an issue.

The points that you make about pressure on the SPCB are important. Could the Scottish Commission for Public Audit provide overarching support that would help to prevent the SPCB’s having to do everything? It goes back to the question earlier about why we choose the SPCB model—we do so because we know it and it works. That relates to why the committee is doing the inquiry. What lessons can be learned?

There are ways in which we could support commissioners without overwhelming the SPCB, and if we think about what capacity exists, there are definitely wins to be had, which would be a big benefit for our committees and help us to learn from best practice and experience.

Given that we now have a financial commitment to invest from the Scottish Government and £200 million from the UK Government’s National Wealth Fund, what is the timescale for getting new projects over the line, so that we see the new jobs that we need being created using the infrastructure in Grangemouth?

What lessons will be learned from the experience at the sick kids hospital? The cabinet secretary said that the impact of unclear or poor communication on the wellbeing of parents, patients and their families during a difficult, emotional and uncertain period in their lives is not to be underestimated. I am thinking, in particular, about the design of the new eye pavilion in Lothian. It has been approved, but the existing eye pavilion is shut and it will be years before it is replaced.

What lessons will need to be learned on patient support and communications, and then on the design of the new hospital, so that it is built on time and is safe for patients, staff and families from the day that it is ready?

I am responding to the debate. I heard Ben Macpherson’s speech, and I might come back to it.

The review of Ofgem is encouraging it to champion our consumers. There is also a focus on community renewables and community benefits, and on enabling renewables in England.

Other critical issues that Labour has pursued include increasing the state pension rate, retaining the triple lock and increasing the living wage. We have also had this week’s announcement about the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, which will enable households that are experiencing the effects of new or upgraded energy transmission infrastructure to get discounts on their bills. Those are practical measures.

I want to finish on this one.

In Labour’s first budget, that investment was prioritised for affordable social housing, yet, in Scotland, there is an affordable housing crisis.

The cabinet secretary also talked about free bus travel. I introduced it for the over-60s, and we also have it for the under-22s. That is fantastic but, as we have said before, if there is no bus, it is not much use. We are seeing a loss of affordable buses.

Several colleagues have talked about the millions of journeys that our constituents were able to make when peak rail fares were abolished. Now, however, they have been reintroduced, so many people will not be able to afford the train.

Therefore, we have a problem, which is about energy, people’s homes and what more could be done. I say to colleagues that the Labour Government is now interested in both short-term and long-term solutions to the problems that the people of Scotland face.

In his opening remarks, Paul O’Kane mentioned the fact that the £150 warm home discount scheme, which will provide help to an extra 220,000 households across Scotland, comes on top of the £41 million of funding for the 2024 winter that has just passed, which has given vital assistance to our constituents.

We are also investing in the long term. There is investment in the grid and in ensuring that we have sustainable, cheaper energy, and there is a longer-term approach to ensuring that we get the investment that we need for base-load and renewables. Long-term and short-term solutions are critical.

One point that has not been mentioned by most members is renewable heating solutions. We have so many opportunities in Scotland. One thing that has struck me in today’s discussion is the fact that we need to focus on what can actually happen, and we need to make sure that that links to people’s bills. For Scotland to remain a leading figure in the transition to net zero, we need to react to the rising cost of living pressures, but we also need to do the heavy lifting and make sure that we see benefits for our constituents to experience.

This is a debate about energy bills and the cost of living crisis, and we need to look at what more the SNP Government can do now, rather than grandstanding and blaming the UK Government when it is actually getting to work in those areas. We do not need warm words; we need action. The people of Scotland deserve better. Let us see it.

Would the member like to comment on the £5.2 billion extra that the Scottish Government got in its budget this year and the £200 million that we got for Grangemouth that will help to keep jobs as well as create new ones as part of project willow?

No—I am about to respond to Patrick Harvie’s points.

On 8 March, it was a year since the consultation on the heat in buildings bill closed, but the bill has still not been published. It would be good to get a timescale for that, as well as for the energy strategy and just transition plan.

We need action and investment. However, this year, despite getting £5.2 billion extra, the SNP cut the energy efficiency and decarbonisation budget by just under 5 per cent in real terms. There was the £47 million that could have been used to create jobs in our communities. Willie Rennie talked about jobs. Last week was apprenticeship week. That was a massive missed opportunity to give people in our communities jobs and make people’s homes energy efficient. That is underperformance.

No. As I said, I am responding to the debate.

I will move on to respond to the speech of the cabinet secretary, who opened the debate. There was lots of talk about what could be done. For example, there was talk about housing. Way more could be done on housing. We saw that in the UK budget—£3.1 billion is to be spent on affordable housing. I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests. There has been nothing like the action that is needed to tackle the housing emergency that we now have in Scotland or to create more affordable social housing and address the issue of thousands of empty homes.

My point is that you have had 14 years of a Tory Government.