Seòmar agus comataidhean

I want to press you on your decision making. Once you have the recommendations, what do you see as being a successful timescale for making decisions that will make a difference? The risks are very high.

On the risks of not being prompt in accelerating all the decision making, you talked about a number of issues. The committee has acknowledged that we will pursue planning consents with our minister. However, on SMEs and supply chains, if the markets are really opening up—for good reason—in the US and the EU, in particular, we must make sure that we have people with the right skills. It is not just about infrastructure. Do you acknowledge that?

Welcome to the committee, minister. Hydro is obviously not a nascent issue.

Clearly, the green hydrogen potential for Scotland is enormous, but we will need a bridge to get there, and the Acorn project is key in that. Last spring, the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee produced a cross-party report highlighting the importance of that. We must bear it in mind that we will not necessarily be able to see that shift to sustainable aviation fuel—or, indeed, the big green hydrogen market that we anticipate that Scotland could realise—for some time. However, it will have an impact on the just transition, particularly for Grangemouth.

I assume that the just transition plan that you produce will not be set in stone, because the plan will be affected every time that there is a milestone or an intervention of what, we hope, will be positive decisions. When you publish it next year, will you make it clear how you will maintain it on an iterative basis, so that it is not only current but forward looking and visionary?

This inquiry is part of the preparation, and we want to input into your plan. We do not expect you to be definitive about what will or will not be in it, but we are discussing what we have heard. Colin Smyth talked about the need for a route map and about how there perhaps should be tangible points along the way to 2045 and the realisation of the final vision.

One of the transport issues that we have heard about is congestion around the site because of the many vehicles that transport the high levels of fuel that are, as you have said, key to the central belt of Scotland. However, there seems to be a lack of ownership, with no one responsible for resolving that issue, and it would be an easy win.

Another win would be to look at the north-south connections from the M8 to Grangemouth. If we are talking about STPR2, I note that the Avon gorge road was the only non-trunk road to be mentioned, and it would stop big lorries, tankers and so on having to do 40-mile round trips. It is probably the only green road in Scotland.

If we are thinking about meaningful wins along the way, whether they relate to transport, housing, flooding measures or whatever, those are the things that we have heard about. I am not saying that they have to be the priorities—although I would argue that they should be, given my constituency interest in the Avon gorge road, in particular—but when you produce your plans, will you look at things that make wider sense and that result in tangible wins not just for the industrial site but for the community around it? Do you expect to consider such issues over the next few months?

Thank you.

The independent just transition commission has suggested that effective communication requires the plans to be co-designed, which has to be a two-way process. It is important to demonstrate that stakeholder feedback can lead to policy changes, so will the Scottish Government seek to do that through the co-design process for the just transition plans? For Grangemouth, who would you define as the stakeholders?

What about the stakeholders?

Who is the cabinet secretary with responsibility for the just transition plan for Grangemouth?

We welcome the fact that we are taking a place-based approach to Grangemouth. Others might want to touch on the prospects for the transition of the site itself and whether the industrial processes can move into the hydrogen sector and the Acorn project, for example. However, all things being well—with the industrial site being able to transition—it could effectively do that in parallel with, or in a separate universe from, the community itself.

Focusing on the community of Grangemouth, we know from previous consultations that one of its key concerns is transport. If everything is successful, we will be expanding the number of jobs at Grangemouth, but that will bring in more cars because public transport in the area is not what it should be. There is no rail link, although there was one in the past. There is quite a serious point to consider about what success looks like and how transport will be critical.

Housing will also be critical. We have been told that, if local businesses that are not on the industrial site but are in Grangemouth are to benefit and grow, they will need more footfall, which means making sure that people live in the area. There is also the challenge of having the quality of housing to attract people and make them want to live there and spend what, we hope, will be their good wages.

To what extent will the just transition plan address those issues? They are quite independent of the transition of the industrial site, but we already know that they are challenges from the many consultations about Grangemouth that have been carried out.