Chamber and committees

Is the £800,000 that you mentioned the Highlands and Islands allocation from the green jobs fund to date, or is that other funding?

Will a proportion of the green jobs fund be used to help the groups that are most underrepresented in green sectors and green jobs? I have been looking at Close the Gap’s analysis of women’s opportunities in and experience of the labour market, particularly during the pandemic. Has that sort of issue been looked at to get a more regional perspective and to see whether it is more relevant in the Highlands and Islands or the south of Scotland?

That does not seem like a huge amount. Can I get a south of Scotland perspective on my question?

I congratulate Lorna Slater on her appointment. In June, before she became a minister, she urged the Scottish Government to get on with delivering a public energy company. I think that it is fair to say that a commitment to an agency is a downgrade. Has the minister’s position changed? Will she vote for the Labour amendment?

I am pleased to open the debate on behalf of Scottish Labour.

In his motion, the cabinet secretary asks the Parliament to agree

“that the Scottish Government must do everything in its power to tackle the escalating climate and nature emergencies and deliver a just transition for all”.

Labour members whole-heartedly share those ambitions.

When the Scottish Government declared a climate emergency back in 2019, the then Cabinet Secretary for Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform stated:

“The evidence is irrefutable. The science is clear, and people have been clear: they expect action.”—[Official Report, 14 May 2019; c 10.]

The people do, indeed, expect action. That is why I argued in the chamber last week that climate inaction is the single biggest threat to our planet. Although we support the intent behind the Government’s motion, we want to see bolder and faster action.

I believe that there is consensus on the ambition for a public energy company. The Scottish Government previously committed to that, there is a democratic mandate and, over the summer, I and a range of colleagues, including Lorna Slater, pressed the Government for an answer on a date for that project. I hope that we can have a constructive discussion on that today. It is disappointing that a public energy company appears to have been taken off the table by ministers. Scottish Labour wants to bring it back to life today.

We are asking the Parliament to agree

“that the Scottish Government should act with urgency to introduce plans for a publicly-owned, not-for-profit energy company”

because we believe that that could be a game changer with multiple benefits that could accelerate Scotland’s journey towards net zero while addressing the affordability of household bills.

We can all see that the market-led model of energy transition is failing. It is failing customers, workers and businesses in Scotland. We must recognise that the state has a huge role to play in helping to build a net zero nation. A Scottish national energy company that is not for profit and owns assets could remove profiteering from the picture and deliver affordable energy to customers. It could facilitate a quicker transition to renewable energy, and it could pioneer new ways of delivering heat into households through methods such as district heating and ground source heat pumps. It is important that it could also help to create the high-skilled green jobs that we badly need.

The just transition commission told us that a publicly owned energy company should be established

“at pace with a broad remit.”

That could be revolutionary for Scotland, and there is precedent for it elsewhere. We can look to Denmark and Ørsted. That company went from producing 15 per cent of its energy from renewables in 2009 to producing 85 per cent of its energy from renewables 10 years later. While the Scottish Parliament was swithering about declaring a climate emergency, Ørsted did better, went way ahead and ran with its big ideas. We can catch up.

I am glad that Mark Ruskell pointed that out. I was going to talk later about local energy co-operatives and what we can do at a local level. Today, the issue is not about being prescriptive about what energy companies should be, but to at least have the debate and to ask the Scottish Government to put those proposals back on the table. We have all got good ideas to contribute.

We need to catch up. The potential benefits of a public energy company were cited in the Common Weal report “Powering our ambitions” and include tackling fuel poverty and social inequality, assisting with achieving national emissions reductions targets, development and deployment of new renewable, low-carbon energy supplies, supporting local energy co-operatives and more. Is it ambitious? Yes. Is this achievable? Absolutely.

I was struck by the remarks of Dr Craig Dalzell, head of policy at Common Weal, when commenting on the escalating gas crisis. He said:

“Someone has to renationalise energy. If Scotland doesn’t, one of Boris’s more sensible successors will. It’s a use-it-or-lose-it situation for the Scottish Government. Use the powers they have to create a national energy company – focusing first on heat, where powers are fully devolved, or those powers will be used elsewhere.”

We believe that plans for an asset-owning, not-for-profit, public energy company should be brought forward without delay. Remember that more than a third of social housing tenants live in fuel poverty. Scotland is an energy-rich nation, but it is to our shame that so many households must choose between heating their homes and eating. The wholesale gas crisis is hugely worrying. We know that bills are rising. Too many children are hungry and too many homes will be freezing this winter. Cutting universal credit is absolutely the wrong thing for the UK Government to do.

I was going to talk about a local visit but I have run out of time because I took an intervention from Mark Ruskell. I will briefly point to the great work that North Ayrshire Council is doing under the leadership of Labour’s Joe Cullinane. It has impressive plans for a second solar and wind farm, which is very exciting and ambitious. There are many good examples of wind resource available to local councils.

The vote tonight should not be the last opportunity to debate and discuss what a publicly owned, not-for-profit, asset-owning national energy company should and could do. I ask members to support the Labour amendment at decision time because we need to choose climate action that is transformative.

I move amendment S6M-01293.3, to insert at end:

“, and agrees that the Scottish Government should act with urgency to introduce plans for a publicly-owned, not-for-profit energy company, to provide direction and large-scale investment into Scotland’s low-carbon energy sector, which will help create high-skilled, green jobs for workers in Scotland, tackle fuel poverty and reduce costs for consumers in Scotland.”

Good morning, Mr Sharma. I whole-heartedly agree that COP26 is an opportunity to showcase what the UK has to offer. Given the IPCC’s report warning that the door is closing on the 1.5°C target, would rejecting the new Cambo oilfield ahead of COP26 be a strong example of the climate leadership that the global community is looking for?

I have a second question, which your officials could perhaps pick up. Will new oil and gas developments be reassessed in the light of the recent IPCC and International Energy Agency reports? If so, will that process include carrying out an economic analysis, including of the carbon dioxide costs, of the Cambo field and others, as has been proposed by Professor Jim Skea of the just transition commission?

Thank you for that response. I apologise if there was a slight technical issue.

Mr Sharma, you have had the role of speaking to people around the world, which has involved a lot of travel, for which you have been criticised. We can perhaps sympathise, given that in-person meetings can be more efficient. Has all that travel and face-to-face negotiation been worth it? What have been the key achievements of that process? We all have high hopes for COP26, but what are your fears about the conference? Is there anything about it that is keeping you awake at night?

Thank you very much.

I want to make some progress.

Without immediate action to reduce emissions, the consequences will include rising sea levels, the extinction of vulnerable species and a higher frequency of natural disasters. Pushing ahead with Cambo would be a betrayal of future generations.

Industrial and economic change is inevitable. It is our duty, as parliamentarians, to guarantee that change and decarbonisation delivers justice for workers. We need a managed and worker-led just transition, because we cannot allow a climate crisis to become a jobs crisis in the north-east or any other part of Scotland. That will require a relentless focus on meaningful, well paid and unionised jobs that are good for people and good for our planet. We just need the political will and courage to act.

Over the summer, I listened to workers and their trade unions. They expressed fears not only about the impacts of climate change, but about their jobs. Those fears are not mutually exclusive. They have good reason to be sceptical about the promises that politicians have made to them. The SNP’s green jobs fund has not yet delivered for workers and, so far, the green jobs workforce academy appears to be an underwhelming website with an impressive name. We know that we must do better.

History has taught us that the Tories do not do just transitions. Workers know that, which is why they are worried. Labour’s position is clear: Cambo must not go ahead, and nothing less than a green new deal will address the twin challenges of climate change and economic transition.

My Scottish Labour colleague Mercedes Villalba has proposed offshore training passports, which would allow oil and gas workers to move freely between offshore and onshore energy sectors, with standardised certification across roles. Such practical policies would give workers confidence. [Interruption.] I would rather give voice to workers than to Tories.

This debate coincides with the release of a landmark report from Friends of the Earth Scotland. Entitled “Watershed: the Turning Point for North Sea Oil and the Just Transition”, the report calls for the redirecting of the tax breaks and subsidies that have been offered to the oil and gas sector into funding a just transition. Notably, the report also recommends the creation of a publicly owned energy company in Scotland. The Tories do not support that, either. Scottish Labour and members of the SNP agree that such a move could turbocharge renewable energy generation and control spiralling heating bills. I urge the Scottish Government not to ditch or delay that proposal.

Earlier today, I hosted a well-attended parliamentary briefing on ecocide, with Jojo Mehta and Philippe Sands QC, who are distinguished international environmental and human rights campaigners. The ecocide proposal would criminalise the large-scale destruction of fragile ecosystems. It is a law that could one day apply to proposed developments such as Cambo.