Seòmar agus comataidhean

In the light of their experience, how do the panellists think that we can improve the way in which we bring together private, public and third sector organisations from across the globe in order to increase our knowledge of blue carbon and to identify how we move from research to action? Are there any barriers to research and development that we should be aware of?

Karen Wylie said that hearings will be held in person in most cases and that only under certain circumstances will they not be. My question has two parts. What circumstances would those be? In relation to family law, would remote hearings be preferable for some people when domestic abuse might be a factor? Have you had feedback on that?

I asked whether the equalities lens will be used for the evidence that is being gathered and in any consultation analysis for any advancements.

I will follow on from the subject that Maggie was discussing, but get a bit more specific. Effective communication underlies the entire legal process. How will you factor in opportunities to identify impairments and make adjustments for people with disabilities? I am thinking of the deaf community, for example. Kay McCorquodale mentioned equalities duties. Will that lens be used for the evidence and in any consultation analysis for any advancements?

I thank all those people who have put in a tremendous effort to support local communities over the past five days. I note that many people in my constituency are still without power and water.

I have been in touch with vulnerable constituents, some of whom require power for medical equipment and some who require running water to sterilise baby bottles. They have been offered reimbursement for takeaways and hotels, but cannot meet the up-front costs. Once again, people who are living hand to mouth are suffering the most in an emergency. Will the Deputy First Minister outline what alternative measures the Scottish Government is considering to help people in vulnerable circumstances?

I thank Gillian Martin for lodging the motion for debate. The Westminster decision to relegate Scotland’s Acorn project to the second division is an illustration of its misunderstanding of the potential of the Scottish energy industry. It is also a betrayal of future generations, as we witness what has been called

“the terrifying march of climate change”.

It would have been a case of third time lucky, with the first attempt having happened 20 years ago and the second, in 2015, being the £1 billion UK-wide carbon capture and storage competition, which was cancelled by the Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time, George Osborne. Even in 2018, the UK Government admitted that the then infant Acorn demonstrator project had merit. Perhaps if a proposal to build a Peppa Pig World in Peterhead had been on the table, we might have had a different outcome.

I may jest, but this is no laughing matter and neither is investment in a just transition, needed to secure jobs and transfer from the inevitable wind-down of the fossil fuel sector. The experienced and hard workers of the energy sector in the north-east deserve security. The north-east as a whole needs this investment, which will undoubtedly benefit Scotland and the world, as we potentially lead the way in just transition and innovation in the carbon capture and sequestration industry.

I have had recent meetings with Acorn, both prior to and following the recent decision. I am convinced that Acorn will roll up its sleeves and prove Westminster wrong, one way or another. This will not be the end of its story, or Scotland’s story. It is not easy to forget that, at the beginning of this year, Ineos and its joint venture partner at Grangemouth, PetroChina, committed to developing Scotland’s first CCS project with Acorn. In July, it was announced that the Acorn CCS project had agreed to partner with Ineos and Petroineos at Grangemouth to capture and store up to 1 million tonnes of CO₂ by 2027. If the Tories will not support Acorn, I am confident that there will be others who will do so. As Energy Voice commented, if they do not support it, perhaps it will be time to say to Acorn,

“get on with it and tell the Tories to take a hike.”

Once again, so much opportunity is being left in the long grass in what seems like punishment. My predecessor Stewart Stevenson said,

“we’ve had enough of stalling—the UK government must now get on with delivering the project at Peterhead.”

To all intents and purposes, it has failed yet again. It is difficult to be objective when we see that the preferred bidders are two competing projects in what can only be described as red wall territory.

To add pain to the loss of jobs and socio-economic advantage, and injury to the despair and betrayal felt in and around my constituency, we are left without any meaningful explanation as to why the Acorn project has not been chosen in the top league. It is perceived as a purely political decision. The industry has observed:

“Objectivity? Er, that got lost somewhere.”

It is also worth repeating what Sir Ian Wood, another stakeholder, whom I met not long ago, said:

“Scotland is the most cost-effective place to begin CCUS in the UK given the capacity for CO₂ storage in the North Sea and the existing oil and gas infrastructure available to repurpose for CO₂ transport and storage”.

Energy Voice reports that Sir Ian

“also urged Westminster to rank Acorn alongside the winning, so-called Tier One projects.”

I finish by speaking up for my constituents who have voiced their anger at the decision, the thousands of jobs not created and a huge missed opportunity. Acorn will keep the door, and the ear, open to Westminster, I have no doubt. However, if we adopt the tone of the 26th UN climate change conference of the parties—COP26—in Glasgow, we do not have plenty of time to make a real and meaningful difference. Opportunities must be seized. We must live adventurously. Others will not wait while Westminster drags its heels. It should just get on with the investment and do the right thing for the people that it claims to have broad shoulders for.

The word “collaborative” has been used a few times now, and I want to ask about that, but perhaps in a different context. When I speak to farmers, an issue that comes up is the fact that new and more advanced machinery is incredibly weighty—if that is the correct term. Moreover, the physical adaptations that have to be made in converting to hydrogen can add significant tonnage. As a result, in advancing with greener and smarter machinery, we could be causing significant soil disruption. Are you working collaboratively with other industries to inform these innovative moves and to limit such unintended consequences or at least ensure that they are being considered?

I am sure that many of us were touched in some way last week during the remembrance day events. I often think about my grandfather in particular, and how grateful I am to have known him and to have heard his witness of war before he passed. As we remember that past, we must not forget those who need help in the present.

In constituencies including Banffshire and Buchan Coast, a large armed forces community has specific housing needs. How will the Scottish Government ensure that the armed forces will continue to be taken into consideration as the housing sector deals with the challenges that the on-going disruption to supply chains causes, which will undoubtedly impact veterans disproportionately?

To ask the Scottish Government what reassurances it can give to any veterans facing challenges in relation to their local healthcare, housing and accessibility needs. (S6O-00397)

Good afternoon. Urban gulls are having a severe impact on the lives of people who live in my constituency. Although their numbers are in decline overall, the numbers are increasing significantly in certain areas. That is just one example of the changing environment and climate impacts on local communities.

Where is more research needed to understand the drivers and impacts of change in the terrestrial environment? What data do we need in order to find solutions to such issues?