Seòmar agus comataidhean

That is a fair challenge from Ms Chapman about whether we could be doing more. We have expectations of Glasgow Prestwick, and of other airports and businesses across Scotland with regard to their environmental credibility and the support that we need from them if we are to achieve our net zero objectives. The airport has demonstrated and set out quite clearly the levels of regulation that it is currently under in terms of the wider environmental impact, and it has clear decarbonisation objectives.

Whether something is mandated by us or whether it is a commercial decision that has been taken—because the airport recognises, as most businesses do, that the more sustainable businesses will be the most successful businesses in the future—it is there for colleagues to observe. The decisions that it is taking are the right ones to ensure that it supports us in meeting our objectives.

Yes, that is my understanding, and I would expect it to be the case. It is also important to set out that, since the public inquiry findings, we have published the onshore wind sector deal with developers, and they have agreed, on a voluntary basis, to have earlier negotiation and discussion to ensure the mitigation of any potential impact—in this case, on airports, but also on other communities and in other situations. That will also ensure earlier communication with communities on community development and community benefit so that there is a strategic and more creative use of community benefit finance, to ensure that communities see demonstrable benefit.

In this case, it is about ensuring that, where there is a potential development, developers have earlier conversations to ensure that a more collaborative approach is taken, so that some of the issues can be resolved before there is a need for a public inquiry—because of the delays that that poses to developers and the uncertainty that it causes to communities and businesses, it is in everyone’s interest that we come to those decisions more quickly.

With regard to the diversity of income that comes from the airport site, military flights and military income have been a factor for Prestwick airport for quite a considerable time—that has been a feature since the 1930s. That on-going diversity is, as Mr MacDonald’s questioning of senior management demonstrated, incredibly important to ensure the interrelationship between the physical airport, the passenger element, the military element and the wider business operation, which includes other businesses being located on the site.

To answer Mr Stewart’s question directly, there is, of course, on-going scrutiny and the on-going involvement of me and Colin Cook and his team. We have people observing on the operational board on a regular basis. To respond again to Mr Fraser’s question, the creation of SCAD has enhanced our scrutiny as it allows us to have an overview of the way in which all our assets—not just Glasgow Prestwick airport—operate, to ensure that we are stretching them in what they seek to develop through the site.

We have spoken about the opportunities that exist for the spaceport, the advent of sustainable aviation fuel and Prestwick airport’s strategic importance in the delivery of aviation fuel across the network. We need to ensure—as we are—that people continue to pedal fast so that the continued development happens at pace and the opportunities that they have before them are realised.

It is clear that we expect a commitment to ensuring continued passenger activity at the airport.

We set up SCAD on the back of an Audit Scotland recommendation to ensure that we effectively manage the strategic assets that are under our ownership. That has meant that there is greater involvement of senior officials in the operations of those businesses, and a close working relationship. As I reiterated to the convener, day-to-day operational decisions are commercial matters, but, clearly, having a close working relationship on strategic direction is very important. From a more practical, day-to-day perspective, I believe that there has been an improvement in the way in which we operate with our strategic assets. Colin Cook may wish to comment further.

My senior officials, led by Colin Cook, have regular engagement with the airport. We sit on the operations board and have responsibility, as set out in the management statement, for strategy for the airport. We have close involvement, but day-to-day operational decisions are commercial matters for the management and board.

I would be happy to do that. My understanding is as was set out in the earlier evidence session, but I am happy to seek further confirmation of that from UK ministers.

Again, earlier this morning, panel members contradicted the point that Mr Smyth is making. They said that the finance that they currently have available is sufficient for the work that they are seeking to undertake. There is nothing to prevent them from coming to us with a bid for finance or from going to the market to seek it, if that is required.

I do not disagree with Mr Smyth’s question. However, the evidence from panel members this morning suggested that that is not an issue that they are facing or concerned about. We continue to have discussions with them about the work that they are looking to do and the opportunities that they are looking to realise, and we continue to support them in any way possible to ensure that those opportunities are realised.

Yes.