Chamber and committees

Those of us who smelled a rat during the election campaign were right. The people of Lanarkshire were hoodwinked over Monklands. Given what we now know, how can they have any confidence that the SNP Government will build a new hospital? When will it be built and what is the budget?

I thank Stephen Kerr for the intervention. He is absolutely right that we could do with a United Kingdom strategy, but the Scottish Government is in charge of planning here, so we need a Scottish strategy.

The energy demand shows why guidance is urgent. Current Scottish applications would require an estimated 7,300MW of electricity. To put that into context, Scotland’s peak winter electricity demand is just over 4,000MW, so, on paper, the proposals could demand significantly more power than Scotland uses at peak winter demand. That should worry everyone.

On 18 August, the Minister for Public Finance announced that councils must notify the Scottish Government within seven days of receiving an application for a data centre of over 50MW. The Government should be told about plans, but then what? Nobody knows. The central questions remain unanswered: what is a green data centre? What limits apply to diesel or gas back-up generation? What air quality standards can residents rely on?

We also need to know how many of these things Scotland needs, and where they should go. The minister has had all summer to do that thinking, but we have yet to hear the conclusions. Today may be the day that we find out, but I suspect that it will not be.

Data centres are now part of the essential infrastructure of our modern economy. Some data centres already operate here, and in some areas people would barely know they are there. They support cloud computing, online banking, digital public services, cybersecurity, business productivity and, increasingly, artificial intelligence, so we should not simply say no to them. We should welcome investment, innovation and jobs but, equally, we should not wave vast projects through based on marketing slogans, speculative promises and undefined claims of being green.

There is a positive case for investment. Scotland has renewable energy potential, engineering expertise, former industrial land that needs regeneration and a workforce capable of supporting high-value digital jobs, but recognising those benefits does not mean writing a blank cheque. Communities in Ravenscraig, Larbert, Newhouse, West Calder and Chapelhall are entitled to straight answers and protection.

Twelve of the sites in the planning system are on green-belt sites or farmland, including at least two on grade 2 farmland, which is the best that Scotland has. The two brownfield sites are allocated for 1,400 homes. None of the sites in the planning system appears on the priority list drawn up by Government bodies in 2021 and updated in 2023.

Then we have energy and emissions. Data centres need back-up generation and the proposals that we have seen so far in Scotland would use diesel generators. Done well, operators could use renewable power, invest in storage, improve grid connections, recycle waste heat, meet high efficiency standards and deliver local benefits that could support growth and decarbonisation.

That is why I am not arguing for blanket opposition; I am arguing for proper rules, but right now those rules are not clear enough. National planning framework 4 talks about green data centres, but it does not define the term. The guidance should be practical and clear, and it should define what qualifies as a green data centre and set limits on diesel and gas back-up generation.

Transparency matters, too. APRS says that nine of the 16 proposals that reached environmental impact assessment screening were initially not required to carry out those assessments, though three decisions were later overturned by ministers.

Presiding Officer, I have taken some interventions, I am a wee bit over time, and I might have to leave early, so I will finish here. I am calling on the Scottish Government to issue urgent guidance now so that communities, councils and developers know what standards apply before decisions are made. I am really looking forward to hearing the other contributions.

17:29

I thank colleagues, including my good friend Meghan Gallacher, who signed the motion to enable us to debate it today.

I start by apologising to you, Presiding Officer, and to members, as I might have to leave before the end of the debate if it overruns to 6.20. I expect that it might, because there is a lot of interest in the subject. I did inform the office of the Presiding Officers yesterday.

The debate matters because communities across Central Scotland and Lothians West and beyond, who were represented outside the Parliament today, face a wave of hyperscale AI data centre proposals, while the rules to guide decisions have not kept pace.

Yes, of course.

I will certainly come on to that in more detail, but, in summary, yes, I agree.

Ministers have had plenty of time to design and issue guidance, and they have failed. The Deputy First Minister told us earlier today that they would be exploring options for the potential for future planning guidance. Frankly, that was waffle. The First Minister said that the Cabinet would discuss it in the autumn, but councils, our constituents and the developers need the guidance now.

The scale of what is coming forward is extraordinary. According to Action to Protect Rural Scotland, there are now 21 data centre proposals in planning portals. This is a gold rush. We saw something similar with battery storage until the National Energy System Operator ruled on what the country actually needs. That same national direction is now needed for AI data centres, and it is for Government to spell out where they should and should not go. They should not be on green-belt land or prime agricultural land or in areas of great natural beauty. Scotland has plenty of brownfield and industrial sites, and that is where development should be directed.

I did anticipate that. I am happy to move the motion, although I might not be here until the end of the debate—but enjoy yourselves.

I move,

That, under rule 8.14.3, the debate be extended by up to 30 minutes.

Motion agreed to.

We have a deluge of speculative applications for AI data centres across the country. We have heard already that the area that I represent, North Lanarkshire, is designated an AI growth zone. Is not the truth that we need national guidance from the Scottish Government on where those data centres should be and on how many the country requires? That work needs to be expedited at pace over the summer.

[Made a request to intervene.]

I have personally congratulated Douglas Lumsden for winning that by-election.

However, the only reason for the by-election was that I managed to get double jobbing banned. Is it not ironic that Mr Fraser’s party leader, Russell Findlay, opposed that move? Would he care to condemn Mr Findlay for that now?

Will the member take an intervention?