Seòmar agus comataidhean

We all have a responsibility to play a part in that, all being leaders in the public discourse around what is going to be required. Obviously, Government has already taken many actions. We are supporting some of our stakeholders in the actions that they take, for instance with local government, and in the action that is going to be required. We touched on the transmission infrastructure and the understandable need for communities to have information and comfort around what that is going to mean for them—making sure that people have an understanding of why this is all going to be necessary.

There will be difficult things that mean that we all have to change our behaviours, and that will impact on all our lives. However, the challenge that we face is going to be even greater if we do not take this action. This summer we saw the major impact of climate change through the wildfires and extreme weather that hit parts of the world, including Hawaii, the Greek islands and parts of Scotland.

It is incumbent on us to ensure that we are taking our responsibility seriously but that we are also taking people with us and explaining that. As I say, it is a responsibility of the Government but also a responsibility of all of us. Some of the public debate—to be fair, mostly outside these walls and in other institutions—has not been helpful. I really fear that the public discourse that we get from elsewhere on the need for climate change or net zero measures, which are going to be uncomfortable for some people, is not helpful. We need much stronger leadership on the responsibilities that we all have and that we will pay for collectively, as a society, in order to achieve those targets, which are absolutely essential to meet.

I note the emphasis on the word “brief”, and I appreciate that. Thank you.

Good morning, colleagues, and thank you for inviting me to the committee this morning. As we all recognise, we are at a pivotal point in our energy transition. Although Scotland has made excellent strides along the path to net zero, there is still much to do. We need to realise our enormous renewables potential, including in hydrogen and offshore wind. We know that our electricity demand will increase as we increasingly decarbonise the economy, so, to achieve a net zero energy system that can support that wider decarbonisation, we need increasing amounts of clean energy generation and we need our electricity networks to be fit for the net zero future. We need significant investment in our electricity networks to reduce constraint costs and to ensure that green power is available where it is needed.

The United Kingdom appointed independent Electricity Networks Commissioner, Nick Winser, recently set out his recommendations on accelerating the delivery of network infrastructure, and we look forward to working with UK Government colleagues and wider stakeholders on considering and actioning those recommendations.

Since my last appearance in May, we have had welcome confirmation from the UK Government that Acorn is best placed to deliver track 2 CCUS objectives. It is very good news but, as of yet, the UK Government has not published any timescales or further details for the next steps of the project. That should happen as a matter of urgency. It is not just me or the Scottish Government saying that; it is an ask of industry. It is vital that the UK Government moves at pace on Acorn, not just to provide certainty for the industry but to ensure that the project can make a massive contribution to reducing our carbon emissions as quickly as possible. Recent events have demonstrated that we have no time to waste and that we must accelerate our transition to net zero while ensuring maximum economic benefits for Scotland.

I look forward to taking your questions, convener. I hope that that was pithy enough for you.

As I said, making sure that we take communities with us as far as we can is incredibly important. Where we have energy generation infrastructure going in, we have a very clear and high bar of expectation on community benefit. I am keen that we are as creative as we can be to make that community benefit go as far as possible, to make sure that there are economic development opportunities and the social infrastructure that potentially comes from that. I hope that we can get to a place soon where that is possible with transmission infrastructure as well, so that we ensure that demonstrable community benefit can be realised from those developments.

We also have to take into account the incredible economic opportunity that comes from the substantial investment in our grid infrastructure that will be required. A substantial number of jobs will be required to build the infrastructure, and, again, similar to the strategy that we are taking for our energy generation, we want to make sure that we have a supply chain based here in Scotland to ensure that there is maximum economic benefit.

To answer directly your question on whether we can ask industry to do more to provide as much information as early as possible, obviously we already do that. You are right to say that industry is pretty well aware of what will be required. Trying to get that more into the public consciousness and having a greater understanding of why that is required will be incredibly important. The majority of the infrastructure will be required to ensure that we realise our ScotWind potential and take the huge energy potential that is lying particularly off the north coast and move that down south. We need to make sure, as I said, that we take communities with us on that journey.

To give Mr Lumsden confidence, I am well aware of the need for more information, particularly for those in agriculture and food production. I had a round-table session in the south of Scotland, organised by South of Scotland Enterprise, as part of my summer tour. There is a keenness among those who work the land and who generate income from it to do the right thing. Some of them are already looking to decarbonise their operations and have taken big strides to do so. You are right that they are looking for information. I am well aware and cognisant of that, as is Mairi Gougeon. As Kersti Berge said, we will do what we can to provide as much information as we can as quickly as we can.

There is constant evaluation on all our funding streams across Government. We will continue to consider how well they are performing to ensure that—as I have said—we are targeting our limited resource in a way that adds maximum value to our enterprises that are looking to come forward with decarbonisation measures. We will provide as much support as we can to industry. Mr Lumsden has already referenced a number of sectors. This is not just about one element of the economy that will do the heavy lifting for us to reach net zero—it will not just be about energy generation or heat in buildings; there will be a raft of areas, and all of us will have to play our part to ensure that we decarbonise and reach net zero by 2045.

Sorry?

Our target is 2045. We also have 2030 targets. All the funds that we put forward, which Mr Lumsden has listed, are intended to ensure that we take steps in different parts of the economy to reach those ultimate targets. Some of that is about trying to inspire good behaviour; some of it is to support people in taking difficult but necessary decisions around changing the way that they do their operations. All of it is geared up to ensure that we reach the 2045 target.

A process is on-going for each financial year, through the budget process, in terms of the allocation that goes to FMPG. Part of that is about assessing what money will be required in order to continue the work that is on-going. That is partly what has triggered my being here today, because there was a need for additional rigour in relation to the estimates that were given by the chief executive in September.

I am hopeful that we will be in a position where there will not be any further requirement for funding. However, it is not something that I can absolutely guarantee. We are in a very difficult economic situation. Everybody saw the very disappointing UK inflation figures yesterday. Inflation is sitting at a stubbornly high level and we are in a very turbulent economic situation, which will have an impact. However, I am hopeful that that impact can be minimised as far as possible. Obviously, there is a process to inform Parliament should there be any further requests, as there was last year, for an increase in funding. I will ensure that that process is followed, as it was last year.

The work that Mr Cook has outlined is being led by Ms Hall. Mr Tydeman has already sought to deliver productivity improvements and learn lessons from the process of getting vessel 801 to the stage that it is at, which is very close to completion. The substantial element of cost and, therefore, risk to the overall contract is the completion of 802. There was no value-for-money issue with 801. The issue was with 802, because it is further away from being completed.

As I have outlined, my hope is that, by being aware of the issues that there have been—which were, as I said, mostly due to the design issues of 801—we will be able to learn enough to mitigate as far as possible in relation to 802. That cannot be guaranteed until the process is continued, but it is certainly my hope. As I set out in that correspondence and as I have said in the meetings that I have had with Mr Tydeman, my expectation is that the yard will do everything possible to mitigate the risk of any further cost or time overruns.

No. The First Minister set out the Government’s position, which is that we do not expect that to be the case. The chair has a role to play and we have communicated our position to the chair very clearly. It is for the chair to go through the process that he needs to go through. I respect that and I respect his position in this case, but I also share what I presume is the displeasure of Mr Hoy and of colleagues on the committee and in Parliament at the idea of there being performance-related bonuses for a contract that has overrun in terms of both time and cost.