Chamber and committees

I understand that the Law Society of Scotland has also raised some of those issues. It noted:

“there are no domestic legal constraints on the powers of the UK Parliament or UK Government concerning common frameworks.”

Given the sovereign nature of the UK Parliament and the backstop that it presents in all those matters, what conversations have you had with the UK Government about how it intends to use those powers?

Obviously, the whole category of Government activity around the frameworks is forced upon us all by the existence of Brexit, which is another story.

Are all the elements of the frameworks—the working groups and so on—operational now, or are there bits of them that still have to be created?

My take on that differs slightly from that of the convener. It is up to this Parliament to align if it chooses to align, but I will leave that there.

Cabinet secretary, will you say a bit more about how the four-country approach works in practical terms and how much room it leaves for divergence, given that it is this Parliament’s choice whether to diverge or align?

On the back of that, will you explain a bit more about what the market monitoring group does and how it came into being?

I have been contacted by a number of hospitality businesses in my constituency, which are concerned that they may not survive this winter due to the impact of the cost of living crisis, with produce costs and energy bills both having skyrocketed. Given the devastating impact of that and of earlier events on the hospitality sector, can the cabinet secretary outline what representations the Scottish Government is making to the United Kingdom Government on the lack of adequate support for energy costs for small and medium-sized enterprises that are not on the gas grid?

I thank members who signed the motion for the debate. I appreciate that, at first glance, this topic may appear to be niche or islands-centric. If it is, I offer little by way of apology for that. Whether the Western Isles interconnector goes ahead will, in fact, have a profound impact on Scotland’s ability to reach net zero and to play our part in the global fight against climate change.

I recognise the wide array of support that the project attracts. Locally, it is an issue that has the backing of the member of the United Kingdom Parliament, the MSP and the local authority, and the Scottish Government has played an important role over the years in trying to move the project on. All the parties that are represented in the chamber can justifiably claim to have played a role in supporting it, so I very much hope that we hear some of that support tonight.

Most important is that the need for the interconnector is recognised and accepted by the communities that I represent. The lighthouse at the Butt of Lewis has a mention in the Guinness books of world records for being the windiest place in the United Kingdom, and for generations, the wind in Scotland was something to be endured rather than harnessed. Now, with the renewables revolution, we have a huge development opportunity right on our doorstep. Renewables developments are capable of bringing to the islands substantial socioeconomic benefits, which we desperately need.

The islands that I represent are, by and large, economically fragile. The industries on which we have traditionally relied, including textiles, fishing and crofting, have faced challenges in recent decades. The public sector is by far the largest employer, which leaves us vulnerable through prolonged periods of UK austerity such as we are living through now. The greatest challenge that we face in the coming years is in tackling the dual problems of depopulation and having an ageing population.

The construction of a transmission link would unlock hundreds of millions of pounds’ worth of investment from shovel-ready renewables projects across the islands. It is anticipated that a sizeable number of jobs and millions of pounds’ worth of contracts for the local economy would be created during the construction phase. The community benefit funds that developers have pledged to establish would also bring in much-needed revenue.

It is worth noting that the Western Isles are at the forefront of Scotland’s drive to empower communities and to enable them to make decisions about their own areas. Community-owned land covers nearly half the land area and contains 70 per cent of our population. Community trusts have a key part to play in building stronger and more sustainable communities, and many have done so by establishing their own renewables projects. Indeed, community energy in the Western Isles has thrived. Substantial sums of money are brought directly into the community every year for important projects that deal with issues such as fuel poverty, housing, employment and additional community services.

There is, therefore, a real need for an interconnector. The history of the project stretches back over nearly two decades. There is—members will be glad to know—not enough time tonight for me to cover the whole story, but there have been many false dawns and broken promises. When there has been progress, it has felt painfully slow, and a step forward has always seemed to precede at least one step back.

In recent years, with the Scottish Government’s support, it has felt like momentum has built on the issue and it has been going in the right direction. In 2017, the UK Government reintroduced support for remote island wind, and 400MW of onshore wind in the Western Isles secured support through the contracts for difference auctions in the 2019 and 2022 rounds. However, in 2019, the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets rejected a Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks proposal for a 600MW link, and instead proposed a smaller 450MW connection that would have made projects unviable for developers. For the sake of a cost difference of less than 5 per cent, the larger link was rejected.

The need for enhanced grid infrastructure for the ScotWind offshore developments has breathed new life into the case for the interconnector. SSEN has been developing plans for a substantially bigger 1.8GW link, which would have sufficient capacity to accommodate all currently contracted onshore wind sites in the Western Isles and offshore wind in proximity to the Western Isles, with additional headroom for—I hope—future projects.

All that brings us to the latest point in the saga, and the real reason for tonight’s debate. In August, Ofgem consulted on how it could support accelerated delivery of the strategic electricity transmission network upgrades that are needed to meet the UK Government’s 2030 renewable electricity generation ambitions. Despite the 1.8GW transmission link meeting all the criteria, it was omitted from the consultation document’s list of projects, which means that investment in the project continues to be stalled.

I believe that this project is of national significance, that the Western Isles have an enormous role to play in Scotland’s renewables landscape in the coming decades and that the Western Isles transmission link is urgently needed in order to unlock that potential. However, I do not believe that those who have the power to do the unlocking—Ofgem and the UK Government—have treated the issue accordingly. Ofgem has a chance to change that by ensuring that the Western Isles transmission link is included in its final list of projects that are approved for accelerated investment, which is to be published at the end of this year. I hope that members will join me in calling on Ofgem to do just that.

To ask the Scottish Government how its Covid recovery strategy is supporting rural and island tourism businesses. (S6O-01477)

As I mentioned, we have heard from a number of experts. Sir Jonathan Jones KC, the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law and the Hansard Society all expressed concern about UK ministers being allowed, through the proposed legislation, to step firmly into devolved areas and to radically change the relationship with the Scottish Parliament. I think that the Hansard Society described that as a constitutional crisis. Is it?

Thank you for being here again, cabinet secretary. As I am sure that you will have heard if you were listening in, we have heard a lot this morning about the issues that such matters give rise to about the rule of law. Experts have told us their view on that from a legal point of view, but from the point of view of other European countries where the rule of law and constitutions and so forth are taken seriously, what does the current situation do for the UK’s reputation among them?

I will keep it to a couple of brief questions in that case.

I know that this is returning to a theme, but I want to ask about the relation between UK ministers and the Scottish Parliament that could or will emerge from the bill. We have talked a bit about Henry VIII powers and the implications for this Parliament. Thankfully, Henry VIII never had the opportunity to legislate in Scotland. Nonetheless, there is the combination of the Henry VIII powers and other provisions in the bill, together with the decline of the Sewel convention, which has been alluded to. What is the effect of that combination of things? I know that Sir Jonathan Jones mentioned a range of unfortunate precedents, or words to that effect. How does the bill combine with the fact that, arguably at least, there is a decline in the Scottish Parliament’s ability to rely on the Sewel convention?