Hansard

I offer my good wishes to all members for whom this is their final parliamentary debate. I share the disappointment that the cabinet secretary cannot be with us to participate this afternoon. She has not only shown a commitment to tackling climate change, but, as Liz Smith reminded us, has always been approachable and collaborative in her approach.

Although I learned the hard way the risks of taking an intervention from Stewart Stevenson—I have not entirely forgiven him for redirecting one of Orkney’s lifeline ferries to Norway—I feel strangely privileged to be here for his final contribution. I look forward to the remarkable word count of which I am sure he will apprise us later this afternoon.

I also thank all four committees for their diligence in robustly scrutinising the updated plan. The reports capture a vast amount of knowledge, expertise and experience from a wide range of witnesses, to whom I also offer thanks. As a result, today’s debate can only really aspire to be a whistle-stop tour, but I hope that the reports provide reassurance that this Parliament recognises the importance, urgency and scale of the challenge at hand. As the Local Government and Communities Committee observed, the word “challenge” hardly seems sufficient.

I found myself in agreement with the ECCLR Committee’s welcome for the updated plan’s greater emphasis on the role of nature-based solutions, which the Scottish Liberal Democrats strongly support. For all the innovative technologies that we must and will invest in, a diverse ecosystem offers the surest means of storing carbon and reducing emissions. Moreover, the potential for green job creation through restoration and management work is significant. RSPB Scotland estimates that around 8,500 full-time equivalent jobs could be created, so it is an opportunity that cannot be passed up.

The ECCLR Committee warned that 1 million hectares of peatland are degraded in some form or other. The committee goes on to express concern, quite rightly, that

“historically, the Scottish Government has had greater success in reaching tree planting targets than reaching peatland restoration targets.”

I am sure that Mr Lyle will update us on the United Kingdom Government’s performance but, for obvious reasons, that needs to change.

The lack of multiyear funding is perhaps a more recognised and well-established problem. In the face of a climate emergency, we cannot miss targets and opportunities through an inability to plan, a lack of certainty and an overabundance of bureaucracy.

I associate myself with the important points that were made by Local Government and Communities Committee colleagues about linking work to eradicate fuel poverty with efforts to reduce the carbon footprint of housing and buildings. That theme was picked up during the recent passage of the Heat Networks (Scotland) Bill. Orkney is one of seven local authorities with significantly higher rates of fuel poverty and extreme fuel poverty that are well beyond the national average. Despite the Government declaring energy efficiency a national priority before the last election, we seem no closer to addressing that persistent scar on so many of our communities.

I am pleased that the committee underlined that retrofitting existing housing to reduce overall emissions will be one of the biggest challenges. That will be difficult in Orkney and other rural and island areas; for different reasons, it will be difficult in our cities. There are 800,000 tenement households in Scotland, and co-ordinating work to reduce emissions in such housing stock will be a logistical nightmare. It will require clear communication from the Government and accessible support services to help people make informed choices about the options that are available and how best to act.

Unfortunately, as the Energy Saving Trust observed:

“there is low general awareness amongst the population of the need to improve the energy efficiency of their homes and to switch away from conventional heating as well as very low awareness of how people can take action.”

Without improving public awareness, the ambitions in the plan are at risk of being a pipe dream. Sam Foster told the committee that 95 per cent of modern buildings

“fail to satisfy the minimum building standards regulations in ... energy efficiency.”—[Official Report, Local Government and Communities Committee, 27 January 2021; c 6.]

If that statistic is anywhere close to accurate, that is truly alarming.

The need for coherent, co-ordinated and focused change was a theme throughout each committee’s work. It was perhaps exemplified during the Economy, Energy and Fair Work Committee’s visit to Orkney, where members saw first hand the value of taking a whole-system approach. I have spoken before about the impressive, forward-thinking ReFLEX project that is under way in Orkney and that I am now a member of. ReFLEX will match what we can sustainably produce with what consumers need. I whole-heartedly agree with the committee’s call, and that of Willie Coffey, for the Government to deliver on the lessons from the project.

I referred earlier to the opportunities for job creation, for which we see potential in many aspects of the fight against climate change. It will take time to build and adapt our workforce to meet the challenging demands, but people are raring to go, and they are looking for opportunities and the right signals and support from Government. The oil and gas sector is brimful of people with invaluable knowledge, skills and expertise, and many of them recognise the need to transition to sustainable alternatives. Indeed, Friends of the Earth found that 81 per cent of them said that they would consider switching to another sector.

However, as the Economy, Energy and Fair Work Committee heard in evidence, the experience of just transition has not been much felt on the ground to date. Job losses at key sites mean that

“the experience to date demonstrates that promises of green jobs and positive outcomes are easily broken without the concrete policy action to deliver”.

That shows the importance of having a climate change plan that can turn fine words into meaningful action. For every area and sector, we need a route map that is costed, funded and realistic; we do not need another list of excuses as to why work went elsewhere. We cannot start soon enough.

I welcome today’s debate, thank the committees for their hard work and hope to be in a position to continue contributing to efforts to turn these aspirations into actions.