Seòmar agus comataidhean

It has been a really good discussion so far. I would like to move on to how the plan—the extent to which it is a plan has been questioned—links to other Government policies. I will pick on a couple of them. One is about the new industrial decarbonisation programme, which is critical. It is the single biggest driver of reduced emissions in this section of the plan. If you look at the stats, it is really significant. Even starting from 2026 to 2030, there has been quite a significant increase in emissions reduction, which is the ambition. However, the details of what that means in the plan are very limited.

To what extent do you think that the new policies in the draft climate change plan will deliver? It references the opportunity to unlock significant industrial electrification opportunities, but where is the detail? What are your thoughts on that in this section of the plan? The new industrial decarbonisation programme talks about a multiyear budget and linking to support for industry to cover a range of decarbonisation technologies to unlock significant opportunities, but there is not much detail. What would you like to see in the plan, or do you think that there is enough in there already? Professor de Leeuw, you are nodding away. Do you have any thoughts on that?

Another question that comes right off the back of your comments is about joined-up thinking and the green industrial strategy. We have had endless discussions about Grangemouth and, more recently, about Mossmorran. When you look at the opportunities, you can see that they are massive. The Deputy First Minister described the green industrial strategy as a “prospectus approach”. There is something about getting that investment delivered and seeing those opportunities.

Yesterday, we had a debate in Parliament on anaerobic digestion. If you had told me before the debate that we had more than 70 plants in Scotland that link food and drink, heat and waste, I would have been quite surprised. Where we have infrastructure, there is something about how we can kick it up to the next level. The green industrial strategy covers onshore and offshore wind, carbon capture and storage, professional and financial services, which we have not yet mentioned, hydrogen—particularly green hydrogen, and potentially at Grangemouth—and clean energy-intensive industries. There are huge opportunities, but how do you get that investment in there? To what extent is the draft CCP consistent with what is in the green industrial strategy? How do you get the elements to join up?

Who wants to kick off on how we get that to happen? Professor de Leeuw, do you want to come in?

Do we need more clarity? I see that Professor Turner wants to come in. In manufacturing, for example, there are massive developments in onshore and offshore wind, but we do not build the kit in Scotland—we import it all.

Those points are really well made.

I have another point that I want to ask about. There are four actions that the Scottish Government has committed to. We have talked about the UK Government reducing electricity costs, and there is talk of tackling the barriers to decarbonisation faced by energy-intensive industries—there has been discussion on that. However, one of the issues is about developing a resource delivery plan, which will identify a target and enable new clean energy-intensive industries to locate in Scotland. What more would you like to see in the climate change plan in relation to the green industrial strategy?

You have mentioned the supply chain. When we talk to the renewables sector, people always tell us that they need certainty and confidence. What more could be in the climate change plan to incentivise people to invest? We have seen some of the national wealth fund impact. Is there more that could be done through the CCP to give that certainty, perhaps through investors in different key sectors, to get the money going and get those industries—whether it is green hydrogen or CCS—developed in Scotland? Do you have thoughts about how the plan could be more helpful?

It is about that joined-up thinking. Earlier somebody mentioned that we produce lots of electricity, but we are not using it when we produce it, and the constraint cost of is about £1.5 billion at the moment, so—

On a more joined-up approach, you mentioned data centres, but we could be talking about heat. In fact, there are all sorts of opportunities.

I could go on for hours, convener, but I suspect that I should hand back to you to let us move on to the next question.

We have seen massive investment in renewables, whether onshore or offshore wind or solar. I go back to the point that money has been invested. What areas need more investment if we are to get the delivery? In relation to the new industrial decarbonisation programme, the figure looks very small—2.1 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent in emission reductions—but that is the biggest amount in this chapter and it really grows over the next few decades. How will that be delivered in practice? Professor Turner, do you want to come in on that?

Thank you. Back to you, convener.

I suppose that the challenge is that we need to get all of it right at the same time and think about how we future proof the bill.

In evidence to the committee, Professor Robbie highlighted the power of property rights and the risk of unintended consequences if certain items were given property status without our thinking through what the impact could be.

You have just talked about thinking ahead to the future, but there is nothing in the bill about how the legislation will be future proofed. How is that going to happen? It is not addressed in the policy memorandum. Will the Scottish Government commit to undertaking an audit of the potential impact of the bill across Government and non-Government activities?

That goes back to my question about whether the Government will consider undertaking an audit of the potential impact of the bill across Government and non-Government activities. Perhaps you will reflect on that.