Seòmar agus comataidhean

That is a good point. I would like Ms Young to come in, too. That is true. Some of this comes down to environmental review of the project. Because it has taken so long, further reviews have been done and now it might conflict with newer priorities, but it is still not able to move forward.

The related point is how we get coherence. We have observed a lack of coherence. The Sheriffhall roundabout project, for example, is not in line with either the Scottish Government’s or the local council’s net zero or car kilometre ambitions and yet it is still on the books because it has been on the books for a very long time. Three levels of government are involved that have had elections on different cycles, and there does not seem to be any one level of government that can call it off or say, “This is no longer in line with our priorities.” Three levels of government have slightly different priorities and slightly different timescales, and not one of them has the power to say, “This is no longer our priority” or to change the parameters or to pull out of it.

That is partly because of what Mr McInroy was saying about the process bypassing existing mechanisms. I go as far as to say—and I am allowed to say this with my political hat on—that it goes so far as to bypass our devolution settlement in Scotland. I am cynical in some cases about some of these levelling up funds and so on because I think that they are intended to bypass the devolution settlement and thereby undermine Scottish democracy in that way by making the Scottish Parliament look ineffective or unstrategic.

I guess that we have covered how the system was designed for England, how it does not use existing mechanisms and how three levels of government are involved. How can we get coherence? What would be better? How do we make this more coherent?

We have heard that the consultation cannot be started until April. What will be considered as part of the consultation? An equality impact assessment was not conducted for the instrument, but we have just discussed equalities matters whereby the poorest people are those who are most impacted by the change.

As far as I can see, there is no assessment around the minimum threshold for people’s need to spend for disability, illness and care needs. What are the minister’s thoughts on the disincentive to work that is created by garnishing wages in such a way for very low income people? How quickly will the consultation get going and be wrapped up, and what will be considered during the process?

Since my question is about the just transition, this might be a good moment at which to put it, while we are in flow on that point.

I want to pick a little bit more into what your proposal is for the just transition of Grangemouth, because that is worth opening up. I will set a bit of context. In Scotland, oil and gas jobs have reduced by 40 per cent over the past decade, and unemployment figures are relatively low. The transition is under way. It is not ahead of us but is already happening. None of us wants to see mass job losses. A continuation of that gradual decline, while keeping the employment rate high, is what we all want, I think.

If I understand things correctly—and I hope that you will clarify for me if I have got it wrong—in the vision for repurposing the plant and moving to sustainable fuels, it sounds as though the ask is for the UK and Scottish Governments to step in and provide the investment to create the bridge that we have talked about. That is a specific ask for investment. The Scottish Government and I have certainly challenged the UK Government on not investing enough in the green transition. We have said that it simply has not put enough investment in place. Is that what a just transition means—the Government having to cough up money—or do we need something else as well?

Thank you, convener, but my questions have already been answered, so you are off the hook. You brought me in at good moments.

I am also a member of Unite the union.

Thank you for bringing me in now, convener. It means that I will have one less question later, because this is a good moment to ask it.

Thank you for setting out your vision. The Climate Change Committee talks about the need for biofuels to be the bridge that you refer to as we move towards a more fully sustainable future. I would like to hear in more detail about how that proposal, the letter from Sharon Graham and the vision that you have set out can feed into project willow. Is project willow entirely separate, or have you been able to influence it? What you are setting out seems to be an eminently reasonable part of that journey, so is it being included or considered?

I am happy to see this SSSI—I mean this SSI; I am thinking of the wrong portfolio. I am glad that the SSI increases the protected minimum amount of earnings. However, given that another parliamentary committee recommended that the amount be increased to £1,000, I am disappointed that the instrument would not increase the minimum to £1,000.

I note that, in a large proportion of cases, the creditors are local authorities, so it is concerning that an equalities assessment has not been done, because council tax is a regressive tax. It is not a progressive tax; we know that it affects those on lower incomes disproportionately. That is all connected to the Scottish Government’s failure to reform council tax in order to make it a more progressive tax. I have concerns about trapping people in a cycle of debt.

I am not proposing a motion to annul, but I wonder whether we could ask the minister to attend the committee so that we can ask some questions.

I, too, will start with project willow. I think that it is somewhat disingenuous to blame policies that were designed to reduce climate emissions for the current troubles. We are in a climate crisis. Global refinery capacity is going to decline, and older and less efficient refineries are of course going to be at risk. I note that you said in your opening remarks that you knew five years ago that this would need to be looked at.

Petroineos has put £1 billion into the refinery over the past 10 years and has not been able to make it a viable proposition, nor has it been able to start the transition to making it a low-carbon site, even though it identified that idea five years ago. What chance does project willow have of success? The Governments simply do not have the deep pockets that are required, so I have trouble believing that they are the factor that is suddenly going to make this work.

Thank you very much for coming in today. I am very grateful for your work, especially on behalf of vulnerable people.

I notice that you have made a series of recommendations to public and private bodies, both substantial and small. I am particularly interested in your recommendation about reforming tariffs to Ofgem, which I would absolutely support. What is the pattern of take-up in that respect? Do you find that public bodies and Governments are more or less open than private bodies? How effectively are the recommendations taken up? Obviously, you are doing a lot of good work and are making excellent recommendations, but how far do they go?