Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have a separate question, convener. Do you want to bring in Mark Ruskell on this issue, or can I move on?

We have heard about the importance of speed and scale in collaboration between the public sector, councils and private companies when it comes to co-investment in net zero schemes. The committee has heard that that will be key to delivering net zero. At the same time, the Economy and Fair Work Committee has heard about potential risk aversion in councils as a result of the centralising Subsidy Control Bill, which is going through Westminster. We need subsidy control, but we also need to ensure that the pace, ambition and clarity, as has been mentioned, and what can be delivered in local areas—[Inaudible.]—developed by the Scottish Government. That would be helpful in pushing ahead with the collaboration and co-investment of councils and businesses in net zero schemes at the speed and scale that we need.

I put that first of all to Tracy Black and then to Barry McCulloch.

Monica Lennon covered some of the area that I wanted to ask about. Does the minister have any final message to those who are concerned about the environmental impact of plastic pollution in particular?

Is it easier to do offsetting to address that issue than to be part of the decarbonisation agenda for pension funds and their trustees?

Can you make clear that the Scottish Government is in support of subsidy control measures but that they have to be the right ones for Scotland? The Subsidy Control Bill is a consequence of Brexit, but even those in favour of Brexit wanted to see economic growth. As we have heard, risk aversion is implicit in the practical measures of this legislation. If the UK Government could deal with the constitutional aspects and the asymmetry of this, everybody could focus on trying to get the bill right in terms of its measures.

If we forge ahead on net zero with a combination of contributions from the private and public sectors, there is a real danger for one of the biggest areas for economic growth, not just for Scotland but for the rest of the UK. Those practical measures, if they are not addressed—whatever your views on Brexit—will end up having a negative drag on what should be an economic growth opportunity. What are your comments on that?

Good morning, minister. I want to cover agriculture. In its submission on the Subsidy Control Bill, NFU Scotland has said:

“It is critical that devolved governments can continue to develop agricultural policies that suit the unique domestic needs and policy ambitions that are essential for rural businesses and the communities and the economies they underpin. The inclusion of agriculture in the Subsidy Control Bill could severely constrain this.

Safeguards are already in place to secure the integrity of the UK internal market through existing international commitments (WTO Agreement on Agriculture) and the UK controls”.

It also says:

“Agricultural policy is devolved and must not be re-nationalised via the back door by UK-wide subsidy control measures.”

Given that even the agricultural leadership of NFU Scotland is saying that, in terms of your discussions, why is the UK Government including agriculture when it is not normally put together with other subsidies and subsidy control measures? Why is that happening?

Good morning, cabinet secretary. I, too, want to focus on tourism. I will begin by following up on what you said about STERG’s recommendations. Have you calculated how much its funding ask comes to?

Bearing in mind that we are talking about the budget for 2022-23, any spend on phase 2 of the tourism recovery plan to attract visitors and build confidence would be for next summer as well as this summer. If there is a clear indication that visitors need to have confidence in the sector, not including that expenditure in the budget will have an impact. How much do you think phase 2 would cost? If you are saying that you are committed to funding it and that, although you cannot put it in the budget at this stage, you want to do so during 2022-23, do you know much that would cost?

It is okay, as I would like to move on. If you are thinking about figures of £25 million for resource and £24 million for capital for phase 2, that is almost equivalent to the whole of the tourism budget. It is not an insubstantial amount to be missing from the budget, although I think that people will take comfort from the comments that you made, especially those on the tourism sector.

If we look at the budget before us, we can see that the resource budget for VisitScotland is flatlined. The capital expenditure has reduced, but we know that, by and large, VisitScotland’s refurbishments have been completed. Can you give an assurance that the rural tourism infrastructure fund—in which, as you know, I have a keen interest—will not be reduced as a result of the capital reduction?

That leaves the “Tourism special projects” line as the line in the tourism budget that will experience a major reduction. That relates to recovery, as you have explained. Can you provide reassurance on the capital for impact for communities and reassure us that the rural tourism infrastructure fund will be protected? Can you also comment on the fact that phase 2 of the tourism recovery plan might double the tourism budget as it is currently set out in the budget if and when you can get the resources for it?

I want to talk about conservation designations and to ask the panel about the challenges for buildings, particularly in terms of potential restrictions on glazing and insulation options.

I know that Historic Environment Scotland has been active on innovation through work with the City of Edinburgh Council. Can a balance be struck for historic urban environments, with celebration and preservation of them while future-proofing them against climate change? We know that there has been a successful conservation area regeneration scheme across Scotland. Is there anything like a conservation area climate change scheme that would enable us to tackle conservation areas in particular?

Does anybody else want to comment? I know from my experience as a minister that there is work going on in that area. I suppose that we need to find out from local authorities why the work has not been rolled out as much as it could have been.