Seòmar agus comataidhean

I am proud of the progress that we have made, but it is clear that targets have been missed. What contribution to those targets being missed would Douglas Lumsden attribute to his party’s position on low-emission zones and workplace parking, or to his colleagues in the Scotland Office completely bringing the deposit return scheme to an end?

In what way does decarbonising faster than the rest of the UK and the EU27 not demonstrate global leadership on emissions reduction?

Do I have any time to take those interventions, Presiding Officer?

Sarah Boyack is absolutely right to talk about the deliberations that took place prior to the passing of the Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Act 2019, but the CCC’s advice following passage of the bill stated:

“we find that the legislated 2030 target of a 75% reduction in Scottish emissions goes beyond any of our five scenarios for emissions reduction by that date.”

The CCC went on to set out some potential options, which were embedded in the use of carbon capture and storage. Does Sarah Boyack regret, as I do, that the UK Government has failed to deploy CCS in the time since the 2019 act was passed?

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer, and I thank all members who have passed on their kind wishes.

I am really pleased to close the debate, which is the fourth in the Government’s series exploring the First Minister’s top priorities for the Government that he leads. As Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy for one more day, I am delighted that the First Minister has placed the climate and nature emergencies among his top priorities, alongside growing our economy, delivering excellent public services and eradicating child poverty.

During the time that I have worked on the matter, in a number of different roles, I have had the privilege of seeing ministers, Government officials, parliamentarians from across the chamber, communities, organisations and businesses alike work exceptionally hard to rise to the challenge before us—and it is a significant challenge.

Like every country that is dedicated to this journey, we are, naturally, grappling with the scale and complexity of the challenge. As such, the work that we have undertaken has been actively iterative. Scotland has both led the way and learned as we have gone along. In that time, we have achieved so much of which I am proud. I am pleased that members across the chamber have highlighted some of those successes today. My colleague Gillian Martin kicked us off in that regard, but Rona Mackay was absolutely right to highlight the transition that Scotland is on to becoming a renewables powerhouse while, at the same time, platforming the unacceptable situation of transmission charges that we continue to face.

I am also pleased that my colleague Ben Macpherson raised the important link between air pollution and ill health, which I am very passionate about solving, and that he spoke of the development of four low-emission zones in that regard. I am also pleased that, in the past number of years, we have seen all the air quality monitoring sites in Scotland meet their objectives for the first time outside a lockdown period. That is undoubtedly having an impact on Scotland’s public health, and I welcome it strongly.

I am grateful to Mark Ruskell for highlighting the work that we achieved together in government, and I look forward to continuing to work with him and his colleagues as we take forward a number of those areas.

The emissions reduction impact of much of what we have done in the past five years will not be felt until the future. That is particularly the case for our natural environment and the energy transition, but we have to act now to see results in future years. The Government continues to do that on an on-going basis, and I often talk of our acceptance that we must continually challenge ourselves in that regard.

I agree entirely with Alex Rowley that there is a need to reach consensus, and I commit myself to doing that in the chamber and with an incoming UK Government. However, I must put on record my regret that, from my experience in this role, occasionally, Scotland’s Opposition parties appear unable to recognise our nation’s successes, even as they, rightly, hold the Government to account.

I will always celebrate our success while always being clear that more needs to be done. However, Douglas Lumsden and Maurice Golden’s contributions were relentlessly negative and did not seem to accept that their own party’s record has been about standing in the way of even modest measures in the Scottish Parliament. Indeed, their party has a horrendous record in the UK Government, which is contributing to their electoral support utterly falling through the floor.

No, it is not. I am grateful to the member for putting that on the record in the first place and for repeating it now.

However, perhaps another example is that of Sarah Boyack, who I know cares deeply about the issue and has been working on it for a number of years. She was right to talk about the importance of decarbonising buildings, but she did so without speaking to, for example, our “Heat in Buildings” report for 2022-23, which highlights how, through £170 million of investment, we have helped 138,000 households through the Home Energy Scotland advice service, made the homes of more than 8,000 fuel-poor households warmer and easier to heat and installed more than 5,000 zero direct emissions heating systems.

Further, we have not talked about the new build heat standard, which my colleagues in the Greens introduced when they were in government. That is a demonstrably positive move in the decarbonisation of buildings in Scotland.

That is why we have deliberately framed our motion today on climate science and independent advice. I ask all members from all parties to support us in that.

I am very conscious of time, so I will conclude. I am very pleased to close today’s debate. It is apt that it should be the last that I take part in for the Government before my maternity leave, but whether it is for our own children, those around the world or generations to come, we owe it to them all to stand against climate wars and climate denial and to stand for action that is capable of rising to the emergency before us.

For the purposes of rule 9.11 of standing orders, I advise the Parliament that His Majesty, having been informed of the purport of the Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill, has consented to place his prerogative and interests, in so far as they are affected by the bill, at the disposal of the Parliament for the purposes of the bill.

I understand that, and I share Sarah Boyack’s desire for us all to work together to do more and to do it faster. However, my point is that that progress did not emerge because we wished it to; it happened because of strong political leadership, careful policy development, the prioritisation of scarce public money, and a truly cross-societal effort, to which this Government redoubles and restates its commitment today.

I again take the opportunity to highlight and thank all those who have contributed to the progress to date. In an earlier debate, the Conservatives used their motion and their precious time in our national Parliament to criticise those who are campaigning for climate action. It is distasteful and wrong to criticise those who have peacefully but bravely raised their voice in the name of action, calling for ambition from Governments, including my own.

Climate activists act for our future here in Scotland and in the UK, because they know, as this Government does, that communities around the world are truly on the front line of climate change, losing everything up to and including their lives.

My colleague Gillian Martin spoke of much of the work that the SNP has done in recent years to support campaigners in the global south. The people—the climate activists—whom I have met on this journey do that because they have to, frankly. Many have seen utter devastation in their countries and have been forced to act, such as Brenda Mwale from Malawi, Ineza Grace from Rwanda and Salote Soqo from the Pacific, with whom I have worked. There is also my friend Elizabeth Wathuti, who is a Kenyan environment and climate activist and an incredible woman. In addition, there are the women whom I will not name but with whom I have worked on our human rights defender programme, who have risked so much to lead the way on gender and the environment.

Presiding Officer, as politicians, we are often asked who our heroes are. Those activists—those women—are my heroes.

All that work, in Scotland and internationally, is precisely because we fulsomely accept climate science and expert advice that tells us that the impacts of human-caused climate change will continue to intensify.

In overseeing the Government’s work to tackle climate change, I have always been proud of what we have managed to deliver. I spoke about a number of the key deliverables in my statement, and I will continue to do so, because those things do not just happen—they require exceptionally hard policy development and the use of scarce resources.

However, I have also always said that I will never say that that is enough, because the twin crises of the climate emergency and biodiversity decline mean that no Government, no organisation, no business and, really, no individual can say that they are doing enough until, as a community of nations, we have reached net zero and turned the tide on the issue.

I commit to Sarah Boyack that the Government is, as I set out in my statement, continuing to work across the piece, using every lever that we have at our disposal, to reduce emissions at the pace that is required. I also said in my statement how keen I am to work with the incoming Westminster Government to ensure that we collaborate across the United Kingdom. I say sincerely that, when Labour forms the next Government in England, as I think it will, I hope that it will think very seriously about the commitment that it made to invest £28 billion in green activities. That commitment appears to have been dropped, but the consequences of such investment would make a big difference to the work that we could do in Scotland.