Seòmar agus comataidhean

I will be brief, convener.

Mr Doris is correct that the opportunity for more income, as ScotWind becomes operational, is substantial not just in terms of direct income to the Scottish Government but, as I referred to in my introduction, in terms of the huge economic multiplier that comes from supply chain development.

To support ScotWind becoming operational as quickly as possible, we are prioritising it in the budget and through the First Minister’s commitment to investing £500 million over the next five years in development of the supply chain. That helps to build confidence for developers to go through with developing their sites, thereby maximising the opportunity that Mr Doris has pointed to. We hope that we can do that, both from an energy deployment perspective and an economic perspective, through ScotWind.

SNIB is in a period of transition from its establishment only a short period ago to becoming, we hope, self-sustaining. During that period, there are points that we need to establish, including on the advisory board.

We have a strong relationship. I met SNIB’s chair and chief executive last week or the week before. We discussed the strategic priority that is ScotWind and we looked at how we could maximise that opportunity. We already have a strong working relationship but, as the bank develops and grows, we need to ensure that the oversight continues to grow alongside that. That is where the advisory board comes in, and we are working on establishing that.

It would come from—

The advisory board is still being worked on, and there will be an update in due course.

Again, I am happy to provide that in writing to the convener after the meeting.

I think that I said it all earlier. [Laughter.]

I appreciate Mr Macpherson’s question. For clarity, our commitment to halving the consenting time is for onshore wind projects; it is part of the onshore wind sector deal. Although we cannot mandate developers in that area, we have an agreement from them to consult communities at an earlier stage in developments and to propose commitments on community benefit that are both generous and more strategic in the way that such benefit will be derived.

In return, we are considering how we might halve the consenting time for onshore wind projects. That is an important distinction because, from planning and consenting perspectives, wind energy development is clearly at a far more advanced stage. Developers, planning officials and representatives of the regulated bodies are far better versed in those processes than is the case for those for offshore wind or other marine energy projects.

I am also aware that, alongside access to grid, which is probably the greatest barrier to investment that we face on offshore renewables, consenting and providing as much certainty as possible are among the industry’s greatest asks. We are considering what we can do in that space to streamline the process, while balancing the need to take environmental considerations seriously.

I turn to what we are doing through the budget to ensure that planning authorities are able to deal with those processes. In her budget statement, the Deputy First Minister made reference to our looking to work with industry to improve the available support for planning authorities. We are giving early consideration to how we might move forward with planning processes in general—not just for renewables, but for all projects—and with supporting local authorities on those.

I believe that that is considered. I am not entirely familiar with how that is set up, but I will be happy—alongside colleagues—to come back to Mr Doris, to ensure that he has clarity on the question.

I do not have a figure in my head. The likes of SNIB, Scottish Enterprise and other investors have to consider that, and some have stringent targets for it. I would be happy to give a more considered view in writing as part of the further information that I committed to send in the previous evidence session.

Mr Doris is absolutely right. That is precisely one of the reasons why I am so interested in what the Deputy First Minister has committed us to looking at in terms of support for the planning functions that local authorities are responsible for. Some local authorities will have to deal with large, complex planning applications—in some cases in energy, and in some cases in the infrastructure space. I am looking at what might be possible in order to support planning authorities in that space.

There is no direct commitment as yet. What might be possible is part of a current discussion and consultation phase. However, I am very cognisant, as the Government is, of the need to ensure that we are providing as much certainty as possible to potential investors, whether in the energy space or otherwise. We also need to ensure that our planning processes are fit for that work and are able to deal with it—not just in terms of national planning framework 4, but also from a resource perspective. I hope that we will have more detail on that as those considerations continue.