Seòmar agus comataidhean

There are two elements to your question. First, to answer the final part of it, we are publishing our just transition plan early next year. The Grangemouth future industry board continues to be active and working, and I will make sure that its activities and forward work are shared with the committee. I can follow up with correspondence on that, unless Susie has further information that she wants to impart right now.

The green freeport will capture significant activity beyond the Grangemouth site. We are looking to ensure that opportunities are taken advantage of through the green freeport, such as supplying, manufacturing and other services for the offshore renewables sector and other industrial activity.

The joint venture has taken its decision on a commercial basis and, I suspect, regardless of the freeport status. It has been taken with a wider macroeconomic situation in mind. I am happy to have a further discussion about the green freeport and what our ambitions are for it, but I do not think that that had a particular bearing on the decision that has been taken.

I appreciate Mr Stewart’s question. We touched on some of that last week when we talked about Glasgow Prestwick airport. There are challenges around feedstock and regulation, which Mr Hardie articulated well. However, we continue to make the case to the UK Government for a regulatory environment that will support investment in the production of sustainable aviation fuel, which I am looking to pursue. I encourage the committee to look at that in more detail as well, because it has a critical role to play in relation to some of our strategic assets—we have spoken about Glasgow Prestwick—as well as connectivity. Mr Stewart referred to my heritage in Orkney, but that connectivity is also important for the other island groups. We also need to be connected internationally. That plays an important role as we seek to continue to grow the Scottish economy.

Yes, because we have been engaging with the joint venture for some time, and we have ensured that investment has been made on the import terminal to give us assurance on the supply of energy security for Scotland. We have also ensured that a just transition plan will come in ahead of any decision being taken. No final decision is being taken on the future of the refinery yet. The decision that has been taken is to give investment certainty for the import terminal, which allows for the transition of the site and ensures that our energy security needs are met.

Obviously, we will continue to engage with the joint venture, the Grangemouth future industry board—of which we are members—the UK Government and the trade unions about maximising job opportunities, and we will look at how we can support the wider Grangemouth site and at the opportunities that are there for further job opportunities, so that the concerns that Mr Smyth fairly articulated are addressed as best they possibly can be in any interaction with commercial decisions that are taken by Petroineos.

That discussion has to be part of the mix. I do not know whether the committee has reached out to have a UK Government minister appear before it.

That is helpful to know. That question could be posed at that meeting. I think that Susie Townend wishes to supplement what I have said.

I thank Mr Whittle for his question. Perhaps the policy barriers to some of those investments were not made clear this morning, but the policy areas are reserved to the UK Government. Perhaps Mr Whittle can raise with UK ministers, as we are doing, the importance of providing policy certainty on the regulation of the usage and transportation of hydrogen. That is part of the recent Energy Act 2023, which was passed at UK level. Mr Whittle will be able to raise that with whichever UK minister comes before the committee. To be fair, this is an area in which I hope we can have close collaboration and a shared understanding of the opportunity that is before us and the need to move quickly, which Mr Whittle mentioned.

That is on the hydrogen part. On the carbon capture part, Mr Whittle will know very well that we need progress to be made on the track 2 status confirmation so that the continued investment can happen. Alongside the use of hydrogen as a fuel, the carbon capture elements are the greatest way of decarbonising the industrial cluster. We have had an aspiration to see progress on carbon capture for years, and we now want to see progress on hydrogen as well.

On the areas for which we are responsible, we will do what we can to progress things as quickly as possible. However, in relation to the barriers that I believe Mr Hardie described earlier, the main responsibilities lie with the UK Government.

The offtake is there, on the site, as was articulated this morning. The production and usage of that on site is to decarbonise the energy supply that the site needs for its processes. That concern about offtake was addressed this morning, I think. It is already—

I assure Ms Tweed that I have regular conversations with individual oil and gas firms about their operations and what I hope will be their continued investment in green energy and the just transition that we want. I also have conversations with industry representatives. I recently had a meeting with Offshore Energies UK and, on the same day, I met the Scottish cluster and parties who are interested in that. To confirm my answer to previous questions, that provided comfort about the fact that the decision to transition from a refinery to an import terminal will not impact on the Scottish cluster.

My understanding is that there is no connection.