No. It is going to be very challenging.

Are you still talking about a planning application?

A planning application that could come forward.

I am not going to be pushed into talking about a particular project that would require a planning decision, but I will say that the advice that is given to us by the Climate Change Committee puts forward its opinion on what should happen in certain areas. We do not have to transpose that opinion entirely into our climate change plan. You are right that, in accepting the carbon budgets that it has set, we need to find a plan to use those carbon budgets.

I made a statement when the advice was received that we do not agree with the CCC’s suggestion on livestock numbers. We think that we can go further on peatland restoration than it has projected. We think that we can decarbonise our electricity supply, and we are very far ahead on that already.

We obviously need carbon capture, usage and storage to be built out. We have had some positive news about Acorn, which has been given the support that it needs to come to fruition. It is not 100 per cent support, but we are in a much better place than we were with the previous Government. On that point, I come back to my earlier comments about the economic boost that innovating and proving the concept of technologies will give Scotland. Once we have done that and got to net zero, we will be able to export that expertise to other countries.

Mr Lumsden, you are right that, when we disagree with the CCC’s assumptions or opinions, and the carbon emissions that are associated with those opinions, we need to give alternatives. Those will be in the climate change plan, which you will see by the end of October or start of November.

A number of statements on energy will be coming to the Parliament in parallel with the climate change plan, but I cannot currently divulge what they will be about.

That is not what I said.

The Scottish Government puts forward its opinions and ideas to the UK Government about how it can reform the market. Unfortunately, our proposals for a social tariff have not been accepted by either the previous Government or, so far, the current UK Government.

We also want to see a decoupling of the price of gas and electricity, because it is a false coupling. That would make all the difference.

I would like Scotland to have control over all those levers, Mr Lumsden. I would like my answer to you to be that Scotland can have its own electricity market and all the levers of energy policy at its disposal. However, we are a devolved Government and energy policy is largely reserved. Therefore, the only thing that I can say in answer to that direct question is that the Scottish Government must make its views known to the UK Government, which has control of the levers.

The Scottish Government’s views on these issues are mostly in line with those of the industry.

I do not want to step on the toes of my colleague Fiona Hyslop, so I will outline to Parliament her thinking on that. It points to the importance of cross-portfolio working that I work so closely with Fiona Hyslop on this and on dealing with the reality of what it means to reduce car usage. Before I go into what Ms Hyslop has said, I note that, in rural areas in particular, a lot of people rely on their cars for their everyday lives—for getting their kids to school, caring for elderly parents and accessing their jobs—where there might not be a suitable bus route or any rail infrastructure. With regard to the justness of the transition, we need to take into account Scotland’s geography and the demographics of the people we are talking about.

However, it is perfectly reasonable to say that in cities, where people may have access to better public transport and there are facilities and services within walking distance for those who are able to get there, we could reduce car use. As we have seen, some councils have made decisions on the types of cars that they allow into their city centres—Aberdeen City Council is one example.

On 6 March, the Cabinet Secretary for Transport set out that she is revising the 20 per cent target for car use, taking into account the UK Climate Change Committee advice on the carbon budgets and informed by other relevant evidence, to develop a new longer-term target, the timelines for which are aligned with the climate change plan, and which supports the net zero target.

I point to some of the things that Ms Hyslop has talked about, in particular around EV use. We recognise that, given Scotland’s geography, many people will always need cars. I include myself in that, as someone who has to travel around a rural constituency, but I have an EV. Scotland has one of the most comprehensive charging networks in the UK and, through Ms Hyslop and her officials working with the private sector and the publicly owned charging network, there has been a vast increase in the amount of publicly available chargers in Scotland.

A total of £65 million has been invested to support the development of public EV charging, and we met our target for 6,000 public charge points early: two years ahead of schedule. There are still more charge points appearing; members may see them on their commute home. Dundee has particularly good infrastructure for fast charging, which is a real boost to EV drivers.

A lot of pilot studies have been done on the infrastructure around tenements and flats, which do not have access to their own chargers. In addition, we still have grants available for households that can put in their chargers—such grants were, sadly, scrapped in the rest of the UK. Again, that is another lever that is available to the UK Government; we have kept the subsidy scheme and the grants associated with that in place.

We are the only nation in the UK that has an interest-free loan scheme not just for new EVs but for used EVs. That is very attractive but, as a game changer for the take-up of EVs—I hope that Ms Hyslop agrees with me on this—I would like large employers in Scotland to think about offering salary sacrifice schemes to their employees. That would make EVs very attractive to people; they would almost be buying a car tax free, with a 40 per cent reduction on the car through a salary sacrifice scheme. I think that that would lead to a vast improvement in the take-up of EVs.

Dick Winchester will be delighted to be mentioned in a committee meeting, I imagine.

Phil Raines has just reminded me of a third sector that I had forgotten about: industrial decarbonisation.