Chamber and committees

I move amendment S6M-16171.3, to leave out from “opposes” to end and insert:

“believes that communities must be at the heart of the renewable energy transition, and that it is vital that they share in the significant benefits that will be created, in contrast with how Scotland’s communities have been failed for decades under successive UK administrations’ energy policies; notes the ongoing representations by the Scottish Government to the UK Government around the need for energy market reform; further notes that Scotland has some of the most stringent environmental impact regulations anywhere in the world and that the planning and consenting system is designed to ensure that local communities have their say; notes that the proposed reforms have long been the established position in England, which the previous UK Conservative administration did not alter in its 14 years in office, and understands that the proposals would require developers to consult communities much earlier in the planning process, which will ensure that affected communities can more meaningfully influence the process of project development.”

I welcome the opportunity to debate the UK and Scottish Governments’ jointly proposed reforms to the consenting process. It is extremely important that everyone who has a stake in the consenting process hears about and is involved in the reforms.

However, let us clear up something in the Conservatives motion before we get started. Although land use and planning in Scotland are devolved, the powers to legislate for the generation, transmission, distribution and supply of electricity are reserved to the UK Government.

I can really only say that the Government has not reached a decision about a timescale that I can give you today, but we are working our way through the consultation. I have mentioned some of the issues that it is important to get right and some of the unintended consequences that we want to avoid, but I cannot give you a timescale beyond that.

As I said, I cannot answer direct questions about the Housing (Scotland) Bill—you would need to ask another minister to answer them—but you have raised important questions. The Government is alive to the need to balance the rights of tenants and consumers with the need for investment in the system. That is the focus of that bill.

The purpose of the new EPC system is not to force, or to require by law, landlords or others to make changes, but we hope that it will assist people in moving towards them. Ultimately, it is in everyone’s interests for people in Scotland, whether they are house owners or private or social tenants, to be warm and healthy, and we have work to do to get to that point. As I said, the purpose of the EPC system is to provide information to people, because it is right that potential tenants of a private landlord are aware of how warm their house is likely to be.

Ensuring confidence is very important, which is one reason why we are not just changing the information that is available to people but seeking means to ensure that it is accurate and to eliminate anything fraudulent from the system. For instance, as I mentioned, we are reducing the validity of EPCs from 10 years to five years to make them more accurate. We are also introducing tighter governance arrangements for EPCs and measures on the competence and training of EPC assessors who operate in Scotland. Legitimate concerns were raised, so we are ensuring that we do both those things.

As you mentioned, we allocated £1.3 billion in funding. To be candid, I would say that the elephant in the room is that, some months ago, the Scottish Government faced quite a task in reaching what was euphemistically called a path to balance. We are now in a better position, but there was a point at which getting there did not look simple or straightforward. The member will be very well aware of why. However, we have, as I said, committed that money, and we are confident that we are going to make use of it. It is also important to say that all the money has been committed to energy and efficiency projects, which will directly benefit people by addressing fuel poverty and making their houses more sustainable.

Those are all important. I mentioned that reliability and public approval of the technology has climbed and that people are more and more confident about it. It is also important to say—as, I think, I mentioned at the beginning—that no Government can do the work on its own. Government can be a catalyst: it can provide support, grants and loans, but it cannot claim to take on all responsibility for people replacing heating systems for ever more—no Government anywhere in Europe would make such a claim. What the Government can do, as I said, is provide encouragement and support, ensure that the technology is advanced and out there, and that the people who need it are helped.

I can bring in others, if anyone wants to add to that.

I cannot comment on the example from Canada. However, when I was in Shetland, I met people from a business who pointed out that, for a small building firm or contractor in an island setting, one of the huge advantages of having a van, as you mentioned, is that, otherwise, they might have to put their staff up in a hotel or somewhere else for a week so that they can attend a course for three or four days. Therefore, a remote van provides considerable advantages to small contractors in islands and other very rural areas.

It is difficult to tell why that is the case if councils have not responded to us or given us the information. I will ask my officials whether local authorities have given reasons for that.

We are always looking to provide more support and information. For example, we have a van that goes around Scotland to provide advice, support and assistance to small companies that want to get involved in installation of heat pumps. It travels to many rural areas to ensure that information is available to businesses and the sector. Much of the work is about raising awareness among the wider public and providing information and facts about newer or different forms of heating for houses. It is also about providing clearer information through EPCs and about all the other efforts that I have talked about. Ultimately, it is a shared enterprise between the Government, businesses, householders and landlords—all four have to combine their efforts to get information out there.