Chamber and committees

Earlier this year, Stuart Haszeldine, who is a professor of carbon capture and storage at the University of Edinburgh, gave evidence to the Economy, Energy and Fair Work Committee. In response to being asked what was needed to make CCS a success, he said:

“in Scotland we do not have a clear industrial road map for the circularity of our heat or carbon and for putting that back where it came from.”—[Official Report, Economy, Energy and Fair Work Committee, 2 February 2021; c 23.]

Will the cabinet secretary agree to develop a clear industrial road map for Scotland?

The member seems to be attacking both the Supreme Court and our legal system. Is she suggesting that we have a non-impartial legal system in the United Kingdom?

Thank you, Presiding Officer.

The most pressing issue is, of course, climate change. It is undeniably a good thing for Scotland to play a role in helping those around the world who are most vulnerable, such as in Malawi, where Scots are often at the forefront of efforts. The Scottish Catholic International Aid Fund, for example, is working hard to improve access to food, water, and energy there. In Nepal, Tearfund works in the heart of local communities, with much support from a generous Scottish public, as I saw at first hand when I visited in 2018. We should welcome Scottish Government efforts to support climate action in at-risk communities, such as its commitment to train women in leadership roles to mitigate climate impacts.

To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to promote sustainable public procurement. (S6O-00245)

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I think that the previous speaker showed a lack of respect to colleagues in the chamber as well as to you.

The UK is one of the leading nations in both tackling climate change and alleviating poverty. In the past 10 years alone, Britain has protected 88 million people around the world from the impact of climate change, including through helping 41 million people access clean energy and avoiding or reducing 180 million tonnes of emissions. I hope that the member recognises that wonderful contribution. In addition, Britain has committed almost £12 billion over the next five years to support developing countries.

That incredible global mission opens up a huge opportunity for Scotland to lead the world on climate change, strengthen vulnerable communities, protect millions of people and make the world a better place.

The rest of the world looks to Britain as a global leader. With Glasgow hosting COP26, Britain is leading the discussion on how the world tackles climate change. The world pays attention when Britain speaks because we do not just ask others to do the work—we roll up our sleeves and lead by example. The UK has reduced emissions by a quarter in the past decade alone and, just this week, the British Government committed to completely phasing out electricity from fossil fuels by as soon as 2035.

Refusing to fully engage with or even recognise Britain’s global success simply leaves the SNP-Green coalition looking weak and insular. Let us look at its motion: it talks of being a “good global citizen” but then forgets to mention COP26. How is anyone supposed to take the coalition seriously when it forgets to mention the world’s biggest environment summit being hosted in Scotland?

This is the dilemma that the nationalist coalition faces: it wants a bigger global role, but it lacks the credibility to make it happen. Its credibility on climate action was already “wearing thin”, as SCIAF said in its evidence to the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee last week. That same session also saw Oxfam issue an equally stark warning. It said:

“Scotland’s credibility on climate justice is now in significant jeopardy due to it missing three successive annual emissions targets.”

In fact, more than two thirds of SNP climate policies are now off track.

If the SNP-Green coalition wants to be taken seriously on climate change, on the world stage or on anything else, it needs to stop putting its interests before Scotland’s.

Third sector involvement in sustainable procurement is supported through the Scottish Government’s multisupplier framework that is reserved for supported businesses. However, the framework is limited in its scope, with only a handful of suppliers covering a limited number of commodity areas, which means that the vast majority of Scotland’s third sector organisations that are defined as supported businesses under Scotland’s Procurement Reform (Scotland) Act 2014 are excluded. Will the minister commit to review the scope of the framework and look at ways in which it could be extended ahead of the next retendering of the framework agreement?

I will address all those points, so Daniel Johnson should listen.

Otherwise, the SNP would be seizing this opportunity. It would be standing alongside Scottish businesses and supporting them as they export to the world. Accessing international markets is a boon to Scottish business. Our food and drink sector is worth £14 billion to the Scottish economy and it supports 115,400 jobs. There are massive opportunities for the sector to export to the world.

I will start by reflecting on the tone and intention of the motion. The SNP-Green coalition, rather than dealing with the real challenges that are facing our country, would clearly rather spend its time on another tedious piece of Brexit bashing. The motion does not focus on how the Scottish Government can support our businesses to seize the opportunities that are available to them on the global stage, nor does it focus on an approach to working together with Governments across our United Kingdom for the benefit of all our citizens. Instead, it is a catch-all rant against the British Government, which has become a tedious and oft-repeated mantra of this SNP-Green coalition. Its political interests will always come before the countries’ interests.

Will the member take an intervention?