Seòmar agus comataidhean

I am optimistic that we will get a satisfactory conclusion. I will leave it at that.

The UK Government accepts that the clauses touch on devolution but, at the same time, it says, “We do not really need to bother you with it.” Clause 1 is about revenue certainty contracts that will be set over a 10-year period. We have no idea what will happen between now and then—the vast majority of us will not be sitting in this Parliament in 10 years’ time. It is only right that, for devolved areas, this Parliament has the right to say, “Okay, what does that actually mean?” We have no idea what changes there will be or what the outcomes will be of the various discussions that are going on within the UK and globally as to how SAF will develop.

The UK Government’s position is that, “The bill is about a technical thing and we do not need to worry you about it.” Why would we not just consent if the issue were that small? The only reason why a Scottish minister or the Scottish Parliament would refuse consent would be if there were a concern. If the UK Government says to us, “These are minor technical issues and you don’t need to worry about them,” we will agree—if they are minor technical issues.

Convener, I remember you raising the issue about members not getting the time to scrutinise things properly—I believe that you raised that in the chamber last week.

On you go, Terry.

The lifeline services to the islands is the sticking point from the Scottish Government’s point of view. If there is going to be an ADT, it would have to comply with the subsidy control legislation. Until we have bottomed that out—we have not bottomed it out at this stage—we will continue to make sure that our islands stay as connected as they possibly can be. You know as well as I do that island connectivity is vital, so we are not going to jeopardise that in any way, because we do not have certainty about the subsidy control issues.

There is discussion to be had on all those matters. Consumers may want the SAF to be produced as close to their point of consumption as they can get it, but producers may want to produce it closer to their centres of production. We need to have negotiations and conversations at a UK-wide level to ensure that Scotland can be a beneficiary of what the new technology will deliver. It is only right that the Scottish Government explores every avenue to see how we can take advantage of that.

I would imagine that the commercial operators will decide how they are going to price their services for their profit margins. That will be entirely up to them.

There is a whole thing about how SAF is going to be an expensive product to use. If, however, we get into a position where we have a single product that is used globally, the market will drive the price down. I cannot tell you what the price will do in the short term as airlines start to develop their price ranges, given what they have to put in, but as you know—indeed, the committee has heard more about this than anybody else—there is a control mechanism that will help with that. In any case, decisions about pricing will be commercial decisions made by commercial airlines.

Earlier this year, with the cabinet secretary, I hosted a round-table event with the aviation industry. There is huge uncertainty in the sector about what the right way to go is. It depends on the airline and its objective. At the moment, we need to have every tool in the box, because we need to know that we have potential whichever way it goes. It feels like we have been in this position before. Should we go with Betamax or with VHS? We do not know at this stage.

I absolutely take on board the deputy convener's point. He probably knows more about this than anyone else in the room other than the officials. Is there scope to continue with that project? That decision will have to be taken by those who are working on the projects, who will then advise the Government as to whether we are in the right space.

There are a lot of Government-to-Government conversations. They are more at official level. I have met both of the aviation ministers in my time in office, but Terry Shevlin and his team are in regular contact with UK Government officials.

SAF might be more expensive as the technology is developed but, as it is used more, the price should come down.

We cannot not do this; we need to do whatever we can to drive down emissions from aviation. If SAF is more expensive for a period of time, the airlines will work out what that means for their businesses and how they will manage it.

Going back to your point about island connectivity, I would point out that the almost £30 million investment from SNIB and Scottish Enterprise in ZeroAvia is not about SAF but about other technologies. We are already looking at what those technologies are and what they can do for Scotland.

I reiterate my ambition—which is your ambition, too—for Scotland to be at the forefront of all of this. We have to accept that this is a reserved area, but I will certainly be pushing as hard as I can to make sure that we get as much out of it as we possibly can.