Seòmar agus comataidhean

Given that the fund is well established and involves a huge amount of money, how can the public be confident that the bank is not investing in funds that are making money for those who are already wealthy? How does that particular investment contribute to a just transition for Scotland?

Finally, I have a more general question for Scottish Enterprise. COP26 is just around the corner. What do you see as Scotland’s main opportunities to attract investors at the conference?

That is all helpful. I ask Eilidh Mactaggart to expand on her comment on job creation and tell us how many new jobs the fund is expected to lead to. I also have a final question for Willie Watt. Will that investment push the envelope in relation to good practice in commercial forestry? Will it encourage more diverse planting to support native woodland targets and will it require higher levels of certification such as the UK woodland assurance standard?

What percentage of the planting will be native species? Do you have that information to hand?

Thank you—that would be great.

Thank you. There is not an overall definition of green jobs. On the applications that have come in, do you think that some companies will be disappointed because they do not meet the criteria? Do we need to do more to ensure that we have a good and robust working definition?

The green jobs fund has been mentioned today and in the written submissions. There was a call for businesses to apply for funding over the summer. How many applications has Scottish Enterprise received? How many good green jobs do you expect will be created from the first round of funding?

Is the £800,000 that you mentioned the Highlands and Islands allocation from the green jobs fund to date, or is that other funding?

I am glad that Mark Ruskell pointed that out. I was going to talk later about local energy co-operatives and what we can do at a local level. Today, the issue is not about being prescriptive about what energy companies should be, but to at least have the debate and to ask the Scottish Government to put those proposals back on the table. We have all got good ideas to contribute.

We need to catch up. The potential benefits of a public energy company were cited in the Common Weal report “Powering our ambitions” and include tackling fuel poverty and social inequality, assisting with achieving national emissions reductions targets, development and deployment of new renewable, low-carbon energy supplies, supporting local energy co-operatives and more. Is it ambitious? Yes. Is this achievable? Absolutely.

I was struck by the remarks of Dr Craig Dalzell, head of policy at Common Weal, when commenting on the escalating gas crisis. He said:

“Someone has to renationalise energy. If Scotland doesn’t, one of Boris’s more sensible successors will. It’s a use-it-or-lose-it situation for the Scottish Government. Use the powers they have to create a national energy company – focusing first on heat, where powers are fully devolved, or those powers will be used elsewhere.”

We believe that plans for an asset-owning, not-for-profit, public energy company should be brought forward without delay. Remember that more than a third of social housing tenants live in fuel poverty. Scotland is an energy-rich nation, but it is to our shame that so many households must choose between heating their homes and eating. The wholesale gas crisis is hugely worrying. We know that bills are rising. Too many children are hungry and too many homes will be freezing this winter. Cutting universal credit is absolutely the wrong thing for the UK Government to do.

I was going to talk about a local visit but I have run out of time because I took an intervention from Mark Ruskell. I will briefly point to the great work that North Ayrshire Council is doing under the leadership of Labour’s Joe Cullinane. It has impressive plans for a second solar and wind farm, which is very exciting and ambitious. There are many good examples of wind resource available to local councils.

The vote tonight should not be the last opportunity to debate and discuss what a publicly owned, not-for-profit, asset-owning national energy company should and could do. I ask members to support the Labour amendment at decision time because we need to choose climate action that is transformative.

I move amendment S6M-01293.3, to insert at end:

“, and agrees that the Scottish Government should act with urgency to introduce plans for a publicly-owned, not-for-profit energy company, to provide direction and large-scale investment into Scotland’s low-carbon energy sector, which will help create high-skilled, green jobs for workers in Scotland, tackle fuel poverty and reduce costs for consumers in Scotland.”

I congratulate Lorna Slater on her appointment. In June, before she became a minister, she urged the Scottish Government to get on with delivering a public energy company. I think that it is fair to say that a commitment to an agency is a downgrade. Has the minister’s position changed? Will she vote for the Labour amendment?