Skip to main content
Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 19 December 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1037 contributions

|

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Ecocide (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 23 September 2025

Michael Matheson

What happens if they are not acting on an instruction? What if they act in their own way, as a worker, and commit the offence of ecocide as a result? Who should then be sentenced by the courts?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Ecocide (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 23 September 2025

Michael Matheson

Simon Parsons, you are a director in a public agency. Do you think that you should be liable for the actions of your organisation, irrespective of who carries them out, which could carry a criminal penalty of up to 20 years in prison?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 9 September 2025

Michael Matheson

When I talk about things such as “flimsy excuses”, I refer to, for example, your suggestion that electricity is in some way pinned to the international gas price in the UK, when that is a fact; it is what drives our electricity costs. Your party was in government at Westminster for more than a decade and it could have taken action on that if it had chosen to do so. The reality is that it chose not to. Equally, during that time, the Conservatives supported the need to ensure that we achieved net zero by 2050.

In the UK and Scotland, it is not optional; it is a legislative requirement. We are legally obliged to achieve net zero by 2045 and 2050. As parliamentarians, if we choose to ignore that based on flimsy excuses, we are not doing our job properly. That is why I will vote for the motion, even though I accept that parts of the process are not as effective as they could be. I accept the responsibility that we have to tackle the nature and climate emergencies that we face, not only for this generation but for future generations.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 9 September 2025

Michael Matheson

Perhaps I have been clumsy in the way in which I have phrased it. I am thinking about the fact that we have to decarbonise but, if we have to build a significant amount of new energy infrastructure, particularly on the grid side of things, what is the carbon output of the process of electrifying more of our society, and how do we reduce the carbon output from the electrification process? In a rush to decarbonise our society, we might end up producing more carbon as a result of that process in itself.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 9 September 2025

Michael Matheson

Does anyone else have a view on what the hierarchy of priorities should be when we think about the areas of infrastructure that need to be adapted?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 9 September 2025

Michael Matheson

On the decarbonisation of industry and the fuel supply, the CCC has suggested that about two thirds of industry will be decarbonised through electrification and that about a fifth of decarbonisation will come from hydrogen and the use of CCS. Is that an accurate reflection of how industry and the fuel supply sector will be decarbonised, and has the CCC got the balance right in its advice?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 9 September 2025

Michael Matheson

I will leave it there as well.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 9 September 2025

Michael Matheson

Let me finish my point first.

As parliamentarians, we have a collective responsibility to take responsibility for that and show the leadership that is necessary in order to address it, rather than looking for excuses to chase after voters who are drifting to Reform UK.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 9 September 2025

Michael Matheson

When I talk about things such as “flimsy excuses”, I refer to, for example, your suggestion that electricity is in some way pinned to the international gas price in the UK, when that is a fact; it is what drives our electricity costs. Your party was in government at Westminster for more than a decade and it could have taken action on that if it had chosen to do so. The reality is that it chose not to. Equally, during that time, the Conservatives supported the need to ensure that we achieved net zero by 2050.

In the UK and Scotland, it is not optional; it is a legislative requirement. We are legally obliged to achieve net zero by 2045 and 2050. As parliamentarians, if we choose to ignore that based on flimsy excuses, we are not doing our job properly. That is why I will vote for the motion, even though I accept that parts of the process are not as effective as they could be. I accept the responsibility that we have to tackle the nature and climate emergencies that we face, not only for this generation but for future generations.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 9 September 2025

Michael Matheson

Good morning. I want to stick with the themes of infrastructure and adaptation. It has become clear this morning that there is a need for investment in infrastructure to meet the growing change that we are witnessing in our own climate, and to mitigate some of the risks that will we face in the future. Have you a view on whether there should be a hierarchy of priority on what infrastructure we need to start to adapt now in order to meet the risks that we face? Perhaps I could come to Professor Renaud first on that, given his expertise in climate resilience.