Seòmar agus comataidhean

I am keen that the green industrial strategy is as helpful as possible in maximising the economic opportunities that we have with our massive renewable energy potential. Green hydrogen is one element of that and has the potential, depending on where we choose to go, to reduce the need for some of the transmission infrastructure that the convener was talking about, because it is, in essence, an additional opportunity for energy storage. We need to decide what will be the best use and provide the maximum output from using hydrogen as an opportunity.

Certainly, in industrial decarbonisation, you will be familiar with plans in certain parts of industry to use hydrogen as a way in which to reduce carbon emissions in their processes. That is why it is so important, particularly on the CCUS front, that we see a determination from the UK Government on which sites and emitters will be part of that process, so that there is an investable proposition for those industry colleagues as quickly as possible. That industrial decarbonisation will be critical, not just for us in Scotland to meet our 2030 and 2045 targets but for the UK to be able to meet its targets, and CCUS will play an important role in that process.

Yes.

We were hoping that it would help to move the UK Government on a little bit faster in the process and ensure that it realised the industry’s call to take decisions as quickly as possible. I do not think that Mr Lumsden and I are at cross purposes: we both want carbon capture to happen and we want it to have happened yesterday. The challenge is that we want to commit the funding to ensure that we play our part in supporting the industry. However, until we have certainty about which emitters are included and about the timescales, we cannot spend that money. We need to ensure that there is that certainty. I do not think that we are at cross purposes here; we are both in the same area. When that information is available, we will be in a position to spend that money. It is absolutely crucial that the UK Government now takes that action.

The chief executive of Ferguson Marine is due to give an update to the committee at the end of September on the costs and timeline. There has been an impact that has been largely, but not exclusively, due to the Maritime and Coastguard Agency’s taking a different approach to regulation of crew escape from 801. A number of areas of change to the original design have been required. The conversations that I have with the management at Ferguson Marine—and those of my colleagues, including Vikki Halliday in the civil service—are about making sure that the ferries are delivered as quickly as possible and without any undue cost overrun, not least because our island communities need and deserve those ferries to be running as soon as possible.

No, because—with respect—the MCA’s decision making on the safety of crew escapes from the ships is not a minor thing. It is pretty fundamental to whether the design of the ferry allows it to sail. It is not an inconsequential matter. I hope, obviously, that the last update—that the ferry will be in service in spring—can be met, but until the discussions with the MCA are concluded I cannot give a further definitive update. It would be unfair to suggest that the MCA’s decision making is anything other than critical to the delivery of the ferries.

I will need to reply in writing to provide full clarity on that for you. It is also appropriate for me to say that it is not appropriate for me to intervene in the decision making of the MCA, or in the negotiations between—

I will provide detail on that in writing in consultation with David Tydeman, convener. My understanding is that discussions have been on-going with the MCA on all aspects of 801 and 802 over a long period, but I will make sure that I give the full detail and clarity for you in writing.

So they have.

There were a number of questions there; I will try to take them in turn. On the first one, the authority that I gave to proceed related specifically to 802, not 801, because 801 is close to delivery, so there was no issue with cost there. On 802, I needed to consider any additional cost overrun, and I continue to do so, along with the wider elements that I have a responsibility to consider, such as the local economy and the island communities having the ferries as quickly as possible. I suspect that I would still have given ministerial authority, given what we know now.

On the points that you make about further regulatory interactions, I know that Ferguson Marine continues to discuss those matters with Lloyds and to have an iterative sign-off process, which will continue. I hope that the process will not be impacted on by what we are discussing. On the manufacturer’s warranty, CalMac is responsible for negotiations between it and Ferguson Marine. I know that those discussions are on-going and, where required, I will ensure that I am kept abreast of them and ensure that CalMac gets the ferries as quickly as possible and in a way that meets the contracted demands.

As I said to the convener, I will make sure that further detail is provided on those discussions. I will need to consult Mr Tydeman, who has responsibility for that interaction.