Seòmar agus comataidhean

There were a couple of questions on disabilities earlier, and I raised another example. Proper guidance is needed on all those issues to make people aware of them, so I would like to hear a commitment about that. As other members have said, the two issues go together: what we are discussing today and the context. That needs to be in the code of conduct, because young people have not been consulted—we have had that feedback. Getting the two right is critical.

Sorry, but not all young people—

Simon Coop mentioned manufacturing. Berwick Bank and the Pentland project have just been approved, as well as loads of onshore wind projects, but we are not producing the infrastructure in Scotland. Is there more that you think that we need to do to not only create new jobs but have a joined-up approach?

Do you not want to answer any of the specific questions that I posed about the safety issue and travel safety officers? The travel safety officers issue is not just about the code of conduct. It is also about how we get the SSI implemented effectively as a new piece of legislation that ensures that there are consequences for antisocial and disruptive behaviour on our buses.

I would like to ask a question about joined-up thinking, which follows from John Underhill’s comment about getting confidence for investment. The draft energy strategy was published three years ago and we now have a draft climate change plan. Do we need more joined-up thinking so that we can generate investment for the private sector, whether that is for the manufacture of renewables, investment in CCUS, or hydrogen—preferably green? How do we encourage investment and confidence that such investments make sense, given the comments about heat, transport and waste? I will start with John Underhill before I go to other witnesses for a brief comment.

I have two amendments in the group, which would ensure that

“promoting the creation of a Community Wealth Fund and the strategic use of community benefit payments from land use change and renewable energy projects”

to

“support the development of community-led projects”

was prioritised and included in the bill.

By embedding the promotion of such a fund in the bill, we would create a pathway for communities to benefit directly from the economic activity that takes place around them, not as an afterthought but as a core principle. That approach would ensure that the wealth that was generated from our natural assets and the transition to renewables was recycled back into local priorities, so that it supported projects that communities design, lead and control.

Last night, the cross-party group on islands and the cross-party group on renewable energy and energy efficiency held a joint meeting. We heard directly about the huge benefits to local communities of co-operative, community-owned and municipally owned renewables and heat projects investing in Scotland. Rather than wealth being exported, the communities directly benefit and shape the benefits. The statistic that was used last night was that less than 1 per cent of the wind energy that is produced in Scotland is from community-owned facilities. We need to make the most of that huge opportunity.

Richard Leonard’s amendments are really important. Amendments 50 and 51 make particularly important points. The importance of Co-operative Development Scotland and the Scottish National Investment Bank needs to be higher up our agenda. Both could and should play an important role, which should be reflected in legislation.

Amendment 51, which sets out that ministers must encourage Scottish Enterprise, South of Scotland Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise to practically support employee-owned companies, is crucial, because we need to ensure that such opportunities are available.

I am keen to support Lorna Slater’s amendments 41 to 45 on procurement so that local community co-operatives and social enterprises can benefit from the transition to renewables. Paul Sweeney’s amendment 119 seeks to empower and support communities through credit unions and community wealth funds.

There are many good amendments in the group. I take the minister’s point that we cannot use them all, but the ambition behind the amendments that I have mentioned is critical, and they should be included in the bill. A community wealth fund and the strategic use of community benefit payments will be crucial and will create many opportunities.

I have two amendments in the group, which are both aimed at strengthening accountability in the community wealth building statement process.

Amendment 82 would ensure that the annual statement reports on not just the actions that are taken but their impact in delivering the aims that are set out in section 1(2). That would shift the focus from activity to outcomes so that we can see whether community wealth building is genuinely making a difference on the ground. I welcome Lorna Slater’s support for that amendment.

Amendment 83 would require ministers to set out how they have responded to any recommendations from the independent review, and, if they have not acted on them, to explain why. That would prevent recommendations from being ignored and ensure a clear line of accountability between independent scrutiny and Government action.

Together, those amendments would make the reporting process more transparent, more meaningful and more responsive to evidence. Richard Leonard’s points about transparency and inclusivity are also important. The amendments in this group are about strengthening the legislation, and I hope that colleagues can support them today.

As a member of the Unison and Community trade unions, I want to note that is good to have you in front of us today.

There is a real issue around who pays for what and when, and you have talked about job losses and people not having opportunities. How can we ramp up the potential opportunities across every community? You talked about energy, too. I have seen a comment on the need for regional just transition planning, so that people are involved across the country and know where the new jobs are. What is your thinking on that? You mentioned the manufacturing opportunities in new transport infrastructure and sorting out people’s homes to make them energy efficient. How do we ensure that there are jobs that go with those opportunities, now and in the future?

That is really helpful, thanks. I will hand back to you, convener.

I have four amendments in the group, which were crafted with the assistance of Community Land Scotland. The amendments aim to strengthen the bill by ensuring that its general principles prioritise community organisations’ and local businesses’ retention of the wealth that is generated.

My amendment 72 would ensure that the general aims and outcomes of the bill are in

“line with the United Nations sustainable development goals”.

That is absolutely critical. The amended wording would mirror the language of the national performance framework, recognising that financial wealth cannot be separated from social, cultural, environmental and community wealth. I welcome the minister’s support for my amendment 72.

My amendments 73 and 74 would insert stronger wording to ensure that the measures truly promote opportunity, development and equality—which are crucial and should not be options—for community organisations. My amendment 117 would ensure that the UN sustainable development goals are properly defined and included in the legislation.

I hope that we will have constructive discussions. Some amendments present slight variations in wording options, such as among “must”, “should” and “may”. Even if it is not possible for all our amendments to be agreed to, I hope that, when we get to the votes, we will strengthen the bill.