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 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 17 June 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 544 contributions

|

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 29 October 2024

Maurice Golden

I think that any technical changes could be incorporated at stage 3 so, on that basis, I will press amendment 2.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 29 October 2024

Maurice Golden

Amendment not moved, convener.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 29 October 2024

Maurice Golden

The amendments in the group are similar but could be considered differently. Ultimately, the Scottish Government has accepted the principle of having targets—notably, the net zero target for 2045—so my rationale is that interim targets would be helpful. I accept that carbon budgets are a more useful methodology than annual targets, but key interim targets on the road to net zero fit well alongside that.

Amendment 15 includes the 68 per cent target, which was not devised by me. I was not involved at all in the configuration of that target—in fact, it is the Scottish Government’s target for 2030. It is based on the Scottish Government’s assessment five years ago, and it should still be applicable now, unless the rationale in 2019 was flawed or the progress since 2019 has been poor—or both. Any member of the Scottish National Party must support amendment 15 or they are voting against themselves—it is very simple.

I accept that the 2040 target is a more interesting one, but the balance between having carbon budgets and having a target is very useful.

I move amendment 15.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 29 October 2024

Maurice Golden

I am really interested. Obviously, a previous cabinet secretary is on record as saying that the 68 per cent target is easy but ambitious and possible to achieve. Amendment 15 would just codify the Scottish Government’s policy—it should be really easy to support.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 29 October 2024

Maurice Golden

It is a step in the right direction. I am pleased to have worked with the Scottish Government on strengthening reporting and monitoring. I hope that the committee believes that that should be done, and I ask the committee to support the amendment.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 29 October 2024

Maurice Golden

My amendment 48 would require ministers to assess, when preparing the report, whether it is more likely than not that the carbon budget will be met for the given period. If the target is more likely not to be met, the amendment would require ministers to explain why that is the case and what they intend to do to ensure that it is met. The amendment would provide another layer of reporting on and monitoring of annual progress towards carbon budget targets through a strengthening of the provision in section 35B of the 2009 act.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee [Draft]

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 October 2024

Maurice Golden

I agree. We have done an extensive piece of work looking at the issue, and it is valid to have conducted that. Unfortunately, we have reached the end of the road and, therefore, we should close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders, on the basis that consideration has been given to appoint island residents to the boards of public organisations that are responsible for delivering lifeline services to island communities, and that the Scottish Government has stated:

“regardless of what other skills may be required, applicants are asked to demonstrate a knowledge and understanding of how lifeline services affect our island communities.”

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee [Draft]

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 October 2024

Maurice Golden

As a final follow-up, should we write to regional health boards to ask what options for support and reimbursement are available to community healthcare staff who are required to use their personal vehicle as part of their role?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee [Draft]

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 October 2024

Maurice Golden

We should first write to the national health service regional health boards and the Scottish Ambulance Service seeking information on any local stroke awareness pilots that they have undertaken, including their outcomes. In addition, we should write to the Scottish Government highlighting the contributions from Mr Stewart and Mr Kerr on data, on consideration of trials and on commissioning research, and to seek an update on its work to establish existing levels of awareness of stroke symptoms and whether that includes consideration of the awareness among clinical staff of symptoms beyond those captured by the FAST test.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee [Draft]

New Petitions

Meeting date: 9 October 2024

Maurice Golden

I agree that there is quite a lot in this matter. For decades, perhaps, many of our buildings have been unnecessarily demolished, in my view, across the whole of Scotland.

Initially, we should write to the Scottish Government to ask how it can be confident that existing powers contained in the building standards legislation and supporting guidance are sufficient to protect listed buildings from unnecessary demolition. Furthermore, we should ask it how local authorities should determine whether partial or total demolition is the only appropriate solution to address a safety risk in cases that are considered to be urgent. In addition, we should ask it what level of community engagement might be appropriate for local authorities and whether it has considered producing additional guidance to set out the minimum structural evidence required and the provision of appropriate expertise in cases where a listed building is being assessed against the Building (Scotland) Act 2003.