Chamber and committees

First, the member is quite right to point to the fact that economic growth and the decarbonisation of our economy go hand in hand. We are committed to achieving net zero by 2045, and we are proud of our record of climate action to date.

Any further decisions in this area have to be got right, and have to be the product—as I have mentioned many times—of co-operation between Governments. That is why we continue to call on the UK Government to approach decisions on, for instance, the North Sea oil and gas projects case by case, led by rigorous evidence.

A truly just transition will involve building on our strengths as an energy powerhouse, utilising—as I have mentioned many times—our skilled workforce. There are real economic opportunities around net zero and, as I have said, our record in Scotland is one of marrying up our aims on the environment with real economic growth.

The member is right to say that communities must be involved in the planning of those matters. That is one of the reasons why the Scottish Government is committed to initiatives around the environment within communities.

The point that has been made about planning for skills is clearly important, too. In the programme for government for 2025-26, the First Minister reaffirmed that point, committing to

“Introducing a new Scottish Government-led approach to national skills planning, and strengthen regional skills planning, to ensure that post school provision”

is aligned with and

“responsive to Scotland’s strategic skills needs”

in this area.

As Douglas Ross is well aware, we supported the levy as a temporary measure. We do not support the increase in the levy to its current rate, and we do not support the fact that the UK Government appears to have put no end date on it.

I must make a little progress just now—I might come back to the member.

I welcome the UK Government’s recent working paper, which seeks views on the introduction of a mandatory community benefit scheme for low-carbon energy infrastructure—a question that is currently reserved to the UK Government.

As Fergus Ewing recognised amid the thundering delenda ests of his peroration, there are several areas in which the Scottish and UK Governments can co-operate. Although he pointed out—in Latin—that we must “festina lente”, or hurry slowly, the Government recognises that we need to move a posse ad esse: from potentiality to actuality.

The Scottish Government has long called on the UK Government to consult on mandating community benefits for onshore renewables, and I welcome that consultation as a step forward. We will continue to engage to ensure that Scotland’s interests are fully represented. That represents our long-standing leadership in championing community benefit from renewable energy developments. Jackie Dunbar mentioned the importance of tackling fuel poverty as being at the heart of all those efforts, and Alex Rowley referred to that issue, too. They recognised that, in many cases, areas of fuel poverty are also the areas that host projects.

The Scottish Government is committed to growing the community energy sector in Scotland, and the community energy generation growth fund represents an exciting step forward in the development of the community energy pipeline in Scotland that we all wish to see.

We have seen, through CARES, that communities are enthusiastic to do more. I know how important community energy projects are in supporting local economic investment and empowering communities to take ownership of their energy future.

Craig Hoy refers to offshore projects, for instance. The Scottish Government has very developed procedures in place to ensure that, as taxpayers, we do not find ourselves in the situation that he describes. However, he raises important issues that will be faced by many communities when it comes to replacing infrastructure in the future.

This will come as a surprise to Douglas Lumsden, but I agree with his point about the importance of the efforts that are made by volunteers in communities and the fact that that can place a great strain on individuals and communities. I wish to recognise the exceptional efforts that have been made by the community in North Yell, which Beatrice Wishart referred to. I have visited it, and it is a formidable organisation.

We continue to advocate and act for Scotland’s communities to ensure that they receive a just and equitable outcome from our energy transition. Whether that is through community energy, shared ownership or community benefits, it is essential that communities see a positive and lasting legacy.

A number of members asked how smaller local authorities are to cope with large-scale planning issues and the scale of work that is involved. The Scottish Government certainly seeks to support local authorities that are in that position.

Will the member give way?

Alasdair Allan has identified an error in his contribution and provided the following correction.

At col 63, para 5, line 3—

Original text—

I listened carefully to Patrick Harvie’s comments about local control and culture change. In the past 12 months, more than £30 million-worth of benefits have been offered to Scottish communities, supported by our voluntary good practice principles. We agree that, as a Government, we must do more.

Corrected text—

I listened carefully to Patrick Harvie’s comments about local control and culture change. In the past 12 months, more than £29 million-worth of benefits have been offered to Scottish communities, supported by our voluntary good practice principles. We agree that, as a Government, we must do more.

The Scottish Government seeks to work with the UK Government on future reforms of the planning system to ensure that communities are consulted at an earlier stage.

The Scottish Government remains firmly committed to growing community and locally owned energy in Scotland, helping our communities to develop energy projects and supporting Scotland’s progress towards net zero.

I absolutely accept the importance of the issue that he raises about constraint payments. I am sure that he will agree that the authorities at UK level need to be involved in the debate that he has just raised, because it relates to issues that are all reserved.

I thank members for their contributions to a vitally important debate. As other members have mentioned, it has been a debate on which there is a great deal of common ground across the chamber. There was much of that in evidence today, both in the summing-up speeches that we have just heard and throughout.

As we have heard, communities are crucial in our transition to net zero and they must receive the benefits of our renewables revolution. I will begin by trying to answer a question from Christine Grahame, who asked how many communities have bought shares in a wind farm. The picture as at December 2024 was that there were 140 installations in Scotland where shared ownership was either in place or under discussion. The Scottish Government is committed to growing that number and to growing the community energy sector in Scotland, as demonstrated by the community energy generation growth fund. There are many opportunities to be seized, and there is huge potential for communities to own—