 The final item of business is a member's business debate on motion 2299, in the name of Fergus Ewing, on Scotland's fair share, the potential of solar energy in Scotland. This debate will be concluded without any question being put, and I would ask those members who would wish to speak in the debate to please press the request-to-speak buttons now. I call on Fergus Ewing to open the debate up to seven minutes, please, Mr Ewing. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I'm most grateful for all the members who signed my motion and who stayed on for this debate and who will participate in the debate. In fact, believe it or not, this is the very first full debate on the solar energy that there has ever been in the Scottish Parliament, and perhaps that may be because given Scotland's weather being what it is, most people assume that the ways to harness renewable energy are actually better from the wind and the rain, but that's not so. Because whilst to coin or perhaps adapt to phrase, Presiding Officer, Scotland will never become the Saudi Arabia of solar energy, nonetheless we do have an enormous resource that is simply not being used. I'm indebted to Solar Energy Scotland, who has provided an excellent briefing called Scotland's fair share for the illustration of this resource, that if all the sun's energy, which hits the island of Huy, could be collected, that would in fact meet all of Scotland's energy needs. Solar can generate both electricity and heat. It's modular so it can be deployed in a micro or a macro scale. It combines well with other resources, particularly wind and hydro, after all. The sun often shines when the wind doesn't blow. The purpose of this debate, Presiding Officer, is to use the pun to shine some light on the solar. Yes, indeed, pretty poor, but also more seriously to encourage the Scottish Government to support its development with high ambition, strong resolution and, most important of all, in my experience as a minister, hard graft. First of all, solar is now the cheapest form of energy. Prices have fallen by 60 per cent in the past 10 years. Secondly, Scotland will need a flourishing solar sector to help to tackle fuel poverty. Thirdly, solar can secure energy independence at the time of real international instability. Finally, we can reduce our carbon emissions. Once set up, the solar panels will operate at minimal cost for an excess of 30 years. Solar Energy Scotland called on the Scottish Government, in its energy strategy review, to set a target of 4 gigawatts of solar energy by 2030 and a higher ambition of 6 gigawatts. If we did so, and I hope that the minister will indicate whether he is inclined to do so, then we would be mirroring the EU commitment because it is for 600 gigawatts by 2030. Their policy is for, and I quote, a massive redeployment of renewable energy, a redeployment that will have solar energy as the kingpin. Panel by panel, the infinite energy of the sun will help to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. Moreover, the achievement, according to SES, would bring in more than 8,500 jobs to Scotland. That should become a major component of our energy provision. The opportunity exists now, and it really should be grasped. The specific asks, yes, certainly. I am very grateful to Fergus Ewing for taking intervention and congratulating me on securing the debate. The benefits that he has highlighted are ones that will increasingly become recognised. We have just concluded a debate about community wealth building. Given the cost, given the job opportunities and given the revenue potential there is, does he not see this as a very real example of where community wealth building could be anchored? The member is right, but not only that. I read today that Turkey has saved $7 billion by using wind and solar replacing imported fossil fuels—$7 billion. The asks, as Aras follows, are extending permitted development rights to up to 5 megawatt for rooftop solar projects, to exempt on-site solar and storage from business rates, or at least put them on a level playing field with gas-powered combined heat and power, to enable farmers, crofters and landowners to benefit by making claims under a new greening measure to equip them with solar power. That would get things moving, not least in Mr MacArthur's constituency, support solar and land use strategies and, lastly, to set up a ministerially chaired working group with industry representatives to drive this forward. In England and Wales, commercial-scale rooftop solar projects don't typically require full planning permission, and that may explain why the sector has seen rapid expansion there. That also needs to be the case in Scotland. Interesting, the EU is actually committed to shortening the length of time for solar approvals for rooftop installations to three months. I hope that our esteemed planners are listening. Here in Scotland, we should surely match the EU's high levels of ambition, and a working group, established and chaired by the Minister for Energy and Solar Energy, would be a great way to take this forward working with industry. Manufacturing could be a significant bottleneck, particularly bearing in mind our shortage of manufacturing skills. What is your view on our manufacturing capability for solar production? I will give you a bit of time back for the intervention. I think that the member raises a very important point, because it is a fact that most of the solar panels are not manufactured in Scotland or, indeed, in Europe, they are manufactured in China. That can change, but I suspect that economies of scale make that difficult. I think that there is a need for a scale strategy to go along with this, and one in Scotland, again, which would mirror the EU's policy, which is forward looking in this regard. The UK Government does have an important role through off-gem, and that is essentially to ensure that there is fairer and more sufficient grid capacity, and also to avoid hitting consumers, particularly in the Highlands and Islands, so hard. I will curtail my remarks, Presiding Officer, to avoid incurring your wrath and skip on towards the conclusion. I think that we can make swift progress if there is the will—the ministerial will, quite frankly. That means that rooftop solar on public and commercial buildings is the low-hanging fruit, albeit at a high altitude, so to speak. Let's make that happen. Grid rules can be changed if off-gem has the will and the backing of the UK Government. I haven't seen much sign of it, but that doesn't mean that there's any reason why it shouldn't happen. It should. We also need to see farmers and crofters empowered to go green in a real way by extending the greening scheme. We need to see regulations simplified for small business. In conclusion, I strongly encourage the Scottish Government to embrace the power of the sun, and thereby grant Scotland a greener, cheaper and brighter future. I congratulate my colleague Fergus Ewing for securing this evening's important debate and for his excellent opening speech. Currently, solar power is underutilising Scotland's energy mix. It now presents a significant renewable opportunity as we transition to net zero. For too long, Scotland has seen as unfavourable for solar energy generation due to the misconception that electricity generating solar photovoltaic cells need heat and cloudless sky to produce energy. In fact, what is required is light or solar irradiance, in other words, the amount of electromagnetic radiation received from the sun per metre squared. The core technology is hardly new. My former colleague Colin Campbell had solar panels fitted on its corbachon roof way back in 1984, but the cost was astronomical at the time. He hasn't had an electricity bill in two decades. Despite the great potential, geothermal and hydropower may take years to develop, but solar energy, as Fergus Ewing's motion makes clear, is uniquely capable of deployment to the scale required and is the cheapest form of renewable energy at this time, with great jobs creating potential. Development can be planned and panels constructed and installed relatively quickly and easily, for example, through the adoption of rooftop solar panels for households and small and medium-sized enterprises. Therefore, I agree with Solar Energy Scotland's calls for the sector to be given greater attention. Under EU commission plans, all new buildings in the block might soon be fitted with solar roof panels to turbocharge a drive for renewable energy. That would reduce the demand for fossil fuels, particularly Russian oil and gas. I suggested such a measure to the Australian Government way back in 2003. However, at the time, it was considered that photovoltaic cell efficiency was not high enough to justify the cost in those days, and climate change was not a consideration. Solar technology has advanced significantly over the past two decades. When I wrote to the minister just last month on the subject, his positive response was that such a measure will be explored in the forthcoming housing bill. I welcome that. Indeed, we already see solar panels in local authority and housing association new build. In the meantime, there are other policy changes that Scottish and UK Governments can take to stimulate investment in solar energy. As argued by Fergus Ewing, aligning Scotland with England Wales on permitted development rights and business rates for solar power projects would almost certainly lead to an increase in installations across the commercial and industrial sector. Scottish ministers have already indicated that they will review the rules for solar installations as part of wider changes to permitted developments. With regard to ground-mounted large-scale facilities that generate solar power and feed it into the grid, Solar Energy Scotland's report is clear that there are few natural constraints in Scotland, although two proposed developments on my constituents are meeting some local opposition. Unfortunately, it is still the case that renewable energy firms pay massive fees to connect to the national grid. In fact, Scottish generators pay the highest grid connection rates in Europe. It costs £7.36 per megawatt hour in the north of Scotland and £4.70 per megawatt hour in the south, whereas, in much of England and Wales, it costs only £49. In southern England generators are actually paid to connect to the grid, so I ask the minister to again demand of the UK Government that it lost transmission charges, the biggest barrier to Scotland delivering on its renewable potential. Of course, it would help if Tory, Lib Dem and Labour MSPs, whose Governments introduced and maintained those discriminatory charges, spoke out on Scotland's behalf. The solar industry believes that agricultural policy inadvertently disincentivise use of farmland for solar power generation because it does not entitle farmers to greening payments under the basic payment scheme. However, I feel uneasy about extending the same reward to farmers for the energy generation that they receive for producing crops when one of Europe's major bread baskets has been impacted by Russia's invasion of Ukraine. On Monday, Ian Wright of the Food and Drink Sector Council said that there is no proper plan for a future with disruptive food supplies in the UK. In that context, agrivol takes, a simultaneous use of farmland for producing crops and generating power, has shown promise in East Asia and has been trialled in Europe. Install directly above crops, this protects against hail of frost, provides shade and increases the electrical yield of photovoltaic plant panels. Its roll-out should be actively researched and considered in Scotland. Solar energy must be an integral part of our climate emergency response. Solar energy, Scotland asks, are reasonable, straightforward and a trust that Scottish Government will help to make them a reality, enabling Scotland's solar industry to really take off. We all want Scotland to be a front-runner and renewable energy generation. I urge the Scottish Government to be ambitious and consider solutions being trialled elsewhere, including fitting solar panels in all new buildings and exploring the promise that agrivol takes. Once again, I thank Fergus Ewing for this evening's debate. I now call on Liam Kerr to be followed by Colin Smyth up to four minutes please, Mr Kerr. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I congratulate Fergus Ewing for bringing this debate to the Scottish Parliament. It is not before time that I have genuinely never understood why solar has not featured more in projecting our future renewable energy mix as we transition to net zero by 2045. Happily, the industry seems to be powering on, nevertheless. For example, in April 2020, so much solar energy was produced. It met almost 30 per cent of UK electricity demand. Meanwhile, the north-east recently celebrated the potential St Fergus solar farm, which could be the UK's largest solar project if built, powering 15,000 homes and 20,000 electric vehicles per year, and crucially offsetting 720,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide over 40 years. We also see mackies in my region who have 7,000 solar panels, which help them generate twice as much energy as they use and then sell the rest into the grid as green energy. The motion talks about the Scottish Government's role, and this is where we need to see action to avoid being left behind. Our friends elsewhere are seizing the opportunity, with, for example, Germany announcing plans to install 200 gigawatts of solar energy by 2035. We have also seen in Portugal that to build a 12,000 panel floating solar park to power around 1,500 households, and the Danes already running seasonal thermal storage facilities to store solar-generated power. It is not surprising why. Fergus Ewing pointed out that the cost of rooftop solar has fallen by about 60 per cent since 2010, and he will know that the cost of utility-scale solar has fallen by 88 per cent in the same period. To pick up Liam McArthur's intervention earlier on, nearly 9,000 jobs could be created if Scotland realised the solar energy in the UK's ambition of 6 gigawatts by 2030, which would aid the fair and managed transition of workers from other industries, particularly in the north-east. I am surprised that the Scottish Government has set a legally binding target of net zero by 2045, five years sooner than the UK, yet failed to set out how it intends to achieve it using this technology, even though it has the levers to do so, as the motion rightly states. However, it has also failed to make much progress anyway. According to Solar Energy UK, at the end of 2020, Scotland had only 3 per cent of the UK's total deployed solar generation capacity. Furthermore, in response to a PQ that I submitted, I discovered that four-fifths of the Scottish Government buildings are not fitted with solar panels. That's awful. We've got huge estates of public buildings, as Fergus Ewing rightly said. The NHS are schools, so I cannot understand why the Scottish Government has been so slow to grasp this opportunity. This matters, not least because the Scottish Government has to be developing its supply chain now. Test-wide's intervention was absolutely spot on. None of this will work if we do not also have the competent skills base to design, build, install and maintain the infrastructure, whether by transition from other industries or developing new skills through our schools, further and higher education institutions. That is why I support this motion, because I am afraid that the Scottish Government has been caught napping here. To reach net zero, we need ambition, effective planning and strategising. I am right on the time, Mr Day. The evidence suggests that, hitherto, the Government has been quicker on kneejerk gallery playing announcements, such as Kenny Gibson's giving of only half the picture on transmission charges, than a full consideration of how all energy generation technologies can work together as part of the energy mix and a managed transition to net zero. The motion is right. The levers to make this happen sit firmly within the control of the Scottish Government. It is imperative that it acts urgently to assess both deployment and policy changes to embrace and enable this low-cost, mature technology. Thank you to Fergus Ewing for bringing forward his very timely motion. We all know that the clock is ticking if we were to stop the climate emergency becoming a climate catastrophe. Our energy policy is absolutely key to that journey to net zero. Labour believes that that policy needs to have four goals at its heart. Firstly, reducing our energy waste by properly insulating existing properties and building new ones to a zero-carbon standard, not one that will require retrofitting in the future. Secondly, a programme of mass decarbonising of heating, but where the burden does not land on the shoulders of those who can least afford it. Thirdly, a balanced energy supply from variable sources, including not just a rapid growth in renewables, but also a recognition of both the need for better energy security. Given that, by 2050, half of our demand will still be met by oil and gas and there will still be a need for a low-carbon base load energy, meaning a grown-up debate on nuclear power. Fourthly, we need a growth in renewables that does go beyond the recent focus on onshore wind and better delivers those opportunities for offshore wind and, of course, solar energy, which makes Fergus Ewing's motion and the subject of today's debate all the more important. As Fergus Ewing acknowledges, Scotland is behind other countries on solar technology deployment. At the end of 2020, Scotland had only around 3 per cent of the United Kingdom's total deployed solar generation capacity far below the per capita level for the rest of the UK, but that untapped potential does mean that there is a unique opportunity for growth. That is why Labour very much supports the call from Solar Energy UK for that the Scottish Government to commit to and, more importantly, put in place the actions needed to deliver a 2030 Scottish solar deployment ambition of 4 to 6 gigawatts with further growth in the following decade as we move to achieve net zero by 2045. It is why we back that the national planning framework for not just delivering warm words in support of renewables as the current draft does, but it gives clear practical directions such as raising and indeed removing the threshold and permitted development rights. It is why we want to see fiscal measures to support more solar energy being used to power our public buildings and reform of business rates to incentivise larger installations and we do risk continuing to fall behind the rest of the UK where that reform is taking place. By having that ambition and, importantly, those practical measures to grow solar energy, that, along with investment from our Scottish renewable funds that Labour has called for using the £700 million from the Scotland lease and rail round, we can grow Scotland's renewable energy supply chains so that the growth in solar energy leads to a growth in Scottish jobs. Solar energy UK has said that solar power could create more than 8,500 new jobs in Scotland by the end of the decade, but that will only happen if we do not keep repeating the mistakes of the past. Fergus Ewing was right to say that maybe Scotland's climate means we won't become the Saudi Arabia of solar power, but the problem is that the promises of the past that we would become the Saudi Arabia of renewable jobs has fallen flat with less than a quarter of the promised 120,000 jobs and renewables being created. The recent Scotland lease and of Scotland sea beds on the cheap failed to include legally binding guarantees on jobs. It also leased those opportunities and profits almost entirely to overseas-owned multinationals. Scotland will get none of that—the billions of profits and a pitiful level of rent. It was a missed opportunity. 99 per cent of Scotland's onshore wind is also in the hands of private businesses. Increasing untapped opportunities from solar energy production presents a chance to do things differently to create genuine opportunities for a new approach when it comes to ownership, including more community and co-operatively-owned local renewable energy projects. That would ensure that the jobs, the profits and other benefits are returned directly to the local community. A good example of that is the Edinburgh Community Solar Cooperative. It owns and operates 30 solar panels throughout Edinburgh. The profits from that are invested in community projects across the city that promote sustainability and renewable energy, including a grant scheme for community-focused organisations. As a co-operative party MSP, that is a model that I very much support, as part of a genuine, just transition to a cleaner, greener energy policy and an ambition that we all need to grasp. I apologise to the chamber if I need to leave before the end of the debate, as I am hosting a reception in Parliament. I also offer warm thanks to Fergus Ewing for bringing forward this debate. I cannot believe that this is the first time that the Scottish Parliament in devolution has debated solar, but it perhaps emphasises the fact that the technology has been somewhat a Cinderella technology for many years. The reduction in cost that we are starting to see should now usher in a new solar revolution. The Scottish Government should make solar a strong building block of its forthcoming energy strategy this autumn. The installed Scottish solar capacity of 380 megawatts is clearly a fraction of the 4 to 6 gigawatts that is possible, but that potential will not be realised without a new deal for solar, with changes to planning, building standards, non-domestic rates, grid access and agricultural subsidies that Mr Ewing and others have already outlined. Targets have worked for energy generation Scotland since the early days of devolution, sending clear signals to investors. Setting a solar target should be considered in that forthcoming energy strategy. I hope that Ofgem will facilitate investment in the grid that is needed to allow all of Scotland's renewables to make their contribution to UK climate and energy targets. We cannot afford to be pitting one technology against another one. While NPF-4, the national planning framework, elevates the consideration of climate change to the top of planners' minds, it is not yet consistent on the detail with policy 19 on renewables being a problem that the planning minister has committed to fix. Permitted development that the policy already mentioned is a case in point where there are some artificial limits in Scotland on the solar that can be installed on a roof space without planning application required. There are challenges here and there is much policy that needs to be tidied up. With electricity costs set to rise even further, for many households, solar will be the most important technology that can be installed to directly reduce electricity bills. It is the most effective way to empower householders to turn consumers into generators. At a time when all the decarbonisation pathways from transport to heating rely heavily on electricity, solar gives householders the opportunity to be masters of an entire domestic electricity system in their homes, incorporating smart metres, smart car chargers, water heating and household batteries to enable people to balance supply and demand, ultimately reducing dependency on the national grid. This far, though, solar installations have by and large been piecemeal and individual household are led, and installers tell me that the Home Energy Scotland system for accessing finance can be bureaucratic and time consuming. We need to see a change here. I do think that street by street community by community roll-out of solar would help to meet the scale of the opportunity. I do hope that the forthcoming LHE's local energy strategies will be able to plan for how this could be achieved in each council area. There is good precedent here. During the early days of the feeding tariff, Stirling Council installed solar on most of its social rented housing stock. It is the point that you could easily count the number of council houses in any street by their solar rooftops. However, the fact that most owner-occupied houses in those streets remain without solar shows that the roll-out has been far from universal so far. Families need support right now. They need that roll-out on a street by street level rather than the individual application process that we have seen so far. Solar has the brightest of futures, but it will take tweaks, reforms and renewed leadership at both local and national level to make sure that every part of Scotland benefits. I thank Fergus Ewing for securing the debate today. Unlike many others in the chamber, I am surprised to find that this is the first debate on solar energy. I can assure Mr Ewing that, although it may not have been discussed here in the chamber, the cross-party group on science and technology over the past 10 years has held event and hosted speakers on solar power and opportunities. It is included Professor Neil Robertson, currently chair of Malika Materials at the University of Edinburgh, and director of the Scottish Institute for Solar Energy Research Sizer. I am proud to say that Professor Robertson also grew up in Cotnes in my constituency of Motherwell and Blushwell. I attended Transforming Scotland with Solar Energy then in the Scottish Parliament in May 2014, and attended a Sizer conference at the University of Strathclyde in my role as vice-convener of the cross-party group on science and technology. Like Mr Ewing, I see a huge potential for Scotland in this area for reducing carbon emissions, achieving net zero and for the creation of job opportunities as part of the just transition. With any energy security at the forefront of our concerns due to the war in Ukraine and the soaring prices that contribute to the cost of living prices, and alongside the environmental imperative, we must consider and act on a solar future for Scotland. In analysis piece of new scientists just last month by Michael The Page, it posited that the current updated UK energy security strategy would not provide enough energy or security going forward. He questioned that the UK Government policy of ignoring quick winds like insulation, solar and onshore wind installations was instead favouring expensive nuclear power over renewables. To me, that approach does not stack up against our shared climate commitments, and I do not believe that more nuclear is the way forward. The current UK strategy favours expensive nuclear power over what is the cheapest forms of energy available in the UK, as demonstrated by Mr Ewing. Does the member not concede that nuclear is one of the cheapest forms of energy generation once you scale it over the number of years it produces? I think that the lead time into the creation of nuclear installations will virtually wipe out the benefits of that. We have the ability to do solar and onshore wind now, and they are the cheapest and most easily accessible ways forward. Why wait 10 to 15 years for low-carbon energy when it can be done at a fraction of the cost and time? Scotland can do better and for the sake of our environment and our finances. Solar research and technology is increasing and improving at an exponential rate. I remember Professor Robertson telling me that he had been an early adopter for solar, much like our colleague Mr Campbell, in his domestic home. When feed intars were at a premium, because of the rapid increase in photovoltaic cells in their efficiency, the newer installations were as financially beneficial as his own. So much more energy has been generated in just a few short years later. The incredible speed of research and development in solar has made its way into domestic products. For those who think only of solar panels in solar fields or retrofitted to buildings, the number of construction innovations must be understood. Solar roof tiles, solar bricks, solar windows—which I saw myself in Taiwan with USB charging points on the window frame—the opportunities are endless and the innovations are there. Just as Silicon overtook cabinet panels, the development of perovskite tandem panels could reduce the carbon footprint even further. Recent research from Cornell University has shown that it can reduce the payback time of 1.52 years for current silicon panels to only 0.35 years with the development of these new panels, which have yet to make it to market, but I'm sure they will. There's new scientists state in their leader in March 2022 that Europe must tackle its energy crisis now, or face a painful winter, energy and solar power should be turbocharged. Thank you, Ms Adamson. I now call Brian Whittle to be followed by Monica Lennon. Up to four minutes, please, Mr Whittle. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. My congratulations to Fergus Ewing for securing time in the chamber to debate this very important topic. I think it's been said that solar energy is, in so many ways, the poor relation of renewables when we compare it to wind. While the shape of a white wind turbine has become synonymous with Scotland's move towards renewable energy, solar has been markedly less visible. Perhaps it's only natural that Scotland's weather would bring the wind turbine to mind more than the solar panel, but in many ways that symbolises the problem. It is a regularly repeated myth that solar doesn't work in Scotland because we don't get enough sunny days. Indeed, Deputy Presiding Officer, the sun is shining today and the wind is blowing. The rain has been falling too, but unfortunately we've yet to harness that source of energy. However, the idea that solar systems require strong direct sunlight to generate electricity is not based in fact. Solar does not require direct sunlight to generate power. At one point in February 2022, solar was providing more than 20 per cent of the UK's energy, and we can project the electric electricity generation or the yield from a solar system on an annual basis accurately by using known sunrise and sunset times to calculate daylight hours. Solar Energy Scotland reports that solar systems could last for more than 30 years with professional maintenance. Solar is distinct from many other forms of renewables and in many ways is far more flexible technology than wind or hydro. While it's just about possible for an individual household or building owners to install a wind turbine on their property, it's an option really only available to farmers or owners of large industrial sites. Solar panels meanwhile can be easily integrated into individual homes when they're built or retrofitted into older buildings at the same time they can also be deployed at substantial scale on solar farms. Solar supports other sectors to diversify their incomes and creates secure livelihoods. For example, we can talk about agriculture and installing solar farms on fallow land. Following, as we know, helps to regenerate soil quality to increase productivity later while land lays fallow biodiversity also increases. Solar farms on fallow land create productivity where it otherwise would not be helping the farmer reduce their energy costs and improve the sustainability of their operations. Every assessment of our ability to meet our targets for net zero recognises the need for a diverse range of technologies and energy sources. It is a serious risk that we are inadvertently or otherwise putting all our net zero eggs in a small number of technological baskets and leaving others with great long-term potential behind, for example tidal energy, home heating systems other than heat pumps like hydrogen, etc. The next generation of nuclear power, especially around small modular nuclear reactions and advanced modular nuclear reactors, I would point out here that the cheapest electricity that is generated now in the UK is generated from existing nuclear plants. Solar energy, of course, will give way. Does the member not acknowledge that, if the Romans had nuclear power, we would still be looking after the waste? Is he prepared to factor in the costs of several millennia of work needed to deal with nuclear waste? I thank Mark Ruskell for that intervention, and it is quite apt that he mentions the Romans, because, quite frankly, when it comes to nuclear energy, he is living in the past. The innovation in nuclear is so much more advanced, especially around small modular nuclear reactions. Innovation thrives in an environment where there is a genuine diversity of ideas and approaches, and if the Scottish Government does not show that it is open to a broad range of solutions to the challenge of climate change, opting instead to give certain technologies substantially more prominence, then researchers and businesses will not have the confidence to invest in anything else. It is a stark fact that, in all likelihood, none of the infrastructure that is generating our electricity today will still be doing so in 2050. The Scottish nuclear capacity will be gone, existing wind assets will have reached the end of their design life, as will their natural gas power stations. We must take a wide approach, we must support innovation as part of that, and we must give greater backing to solar energy. I thank Fergus Ewing for bringing this debate to the chamber. Due to the number of members who wish to speak in this debate, I am minded to accept a motion without notice under rule 8.14.3 to extend the debate by up to 30 minutes. I now invite Fergus Ewing to move a motion without notice. Thank you. The question is that the debate be extended by up to 30 minutes. Are we all agreed? That is agreed. I now call Monica Lennon to be followed by Douglas Ross up to four minutes. Thank you, Presiding Officer. It is a pleasure to be speaking in this extended debate, so I congratulate Fergus Ewing not only for securing the debate and getting this time in the chamber and bringing some unexpected sunshine with him, but also the fact that so many members have taken part. I think that that is really encouraging, and I have certainly learned a few things in the debate already. When I saw that the motion and that debate had been secured, I felt motivated to take part and come and listen tonight because of the work that I am doing with colleagues on the net zero energy and transport committee. Liam Kerr is a member, Matt Ruskell is a member, and we are currently running at an energy crisis inquiry looking at what needs to be done very much in the here and now, but also looking at longer-term action. We will report on that shortly, but I was very struck by some comments that we heard from fuel poverty charities just a couple of weeks ago. They said that unless both the UK Government and the Scottish Government take bolder action now, there will be a catastrophic loss of life this winter, so I think that that is something that is very much in the minds of all of us when we think about the casework, the emails of people reaching out to us for help and reassurance. I come to this thinking very much about the cost of living crisis and how that intersects with the climate and nature emergencies. I think that the young people of Scotland very much keep our feet to the fire, so it is a pleasure to be back doing school visits and hearing from young people. Before COP26, I was doing a lot of that work, but there is a feeling, I have to say, to all colleagues and all parties that I say it from the back benches. I do not get to speak in the chamber very often now, but we cannot just repeat to our party lines and our slogans and the usual banter. This is much more serious than any of that. We have to work together. The Government has got a massive job to do, all Governments do, and I think that our committees get a really important role to play, the net zero committee that I mentioned, and in that committee I think that we try and leave our party politics the door to work together. We need more of these debates because, quite frankly, since COP26 finished, I feel like we have gone back to a business as usual approach, and we cannot have that. Quite often the really important issues, like we are discussing tonight, are left to members' business when they should be given Government time or opposition party time, so let us look at that. I am also feeling quite encouraged because, yes, I will give way to Liam Kerr. I am very grateful and welcome our comments, but I think that she is absolutely right on that, but does that not mean that the members have to acknowledge the importance of nuclear energy and oil and gas in providing base load whilst we transition to renewables? Monica Lennon? Well, maybe Liam Kerr wants to bring forward his own member's debate to get into that in much more detail. Tonight, in terms of solar energy, we clearly need a robust plan. We need to get on with this. The opportunity has been spelt out to all of us. I think that we have to look at where we are seeing pioneering work already, so North Ayrshire, which has not really been mentioned tonight, but if you look at the solar farms in North Ayrshire, which have been pioneered by Scottish Labour, but, hopefully, that work will continue and that innovation and good practice will be shared throughout Scotland. I think that work in North Ayrshire really ties in nicely with the community wealth building agenda, which we heard about in the chamber earlier. I do want to congratulate Councillor Joel Cullinan on that work. It is really pioneering, and that also helps people with their energy bills. There is groundbreaking work out there, but when I look at my emails and people getting in touch with me, they do not want businesses usual. That is why we have had a digital day of action on Friday to stop things like Jackdaw, which Liam Kerr is happy to see Jackdaw approved, to see Campbell approved. We cannot continue like that. We do want to see more democratic control of energy. The system and the market has completely failed. When I heard from often at the committee inquiry just recently, there was no protection for consumers, so we all know that we cannot continue as we are. We need to work together. We need a just transition. I know that I am out of time. I took a brief intervention, but I think that the points about planning and skills are really relevant. I think that the message that we are hearing from our constituents, young and older, is that the future is ours to create. We just have to get on and do it in the time that we need to act is now. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I am sorry that I may not be able to stay until the very end of the debate, because it has been heavily over-subscribed and we are running over, and I think that that is recognition of the importance of this issue. I also congratulate Fergus Ewing on securing this debate, but I also say that it shames each and every one of us that in 23 years of devolution, this is the first time that we have debated the issue in the chamber. Given the strength of feeling that we have heard from across the various parties, it shows how important it is. It should not have taken 23 years, but it is right that we join tonight to look at the opportunities here in Scotland. I have asked to speak tonight for a couple of reasons. One is to put on record on the chamber floor in the Scottish Parliament what I put down in a member's motion, which has been supported across political parties, which is celebrating and recognising the amazing achievement of AES Solar in Murray on receiving the Queen's Award for Enterprise in the sustainable development category. George Goodsmith and his team do outstanding work in Murray from their base in Forrest, and indeed are one of the oldest solar energy companies in Western Europe and provided solar panels for our very Parliament building here. In the last year, they have increased their employees from 22 to 32. It is a local business that goes from strength to strength, and I was very proud to see it recognised as a recipient of the Queen's Award for Enterprise. I know that pride was shared by George and all his staff, and it was a richly deserved award. I also want to, just in the short time that we have available, elaborate on some of the points that have been mentioned throughout this debate, and I am sure that the Minister will respond to those points. We have heard from a number about permitted developments and about non-domestic rates. I just want to look at that a bit more in the round, because I think that we have heard from across the chamber that people believe that we should see changes here. What would those changes mean? Currently, in Scotland, solar PV is subject to planning at 50 kilowatts, yet in England it is already 20 times greater at 1 megawatt. The UK Government is currently looking, as part of their energy security strategy, to consult on further simplifying the planning for solar. Already, there is a gap, and there is a real risk that that gap could widen even further. I understand from a briefing I received for this debate that solar currently sits in phase 4 of the Scottish PDR review when it has only just released phase 2, meaning that we could be years away from being part of the change that we are already seeing in England since 2015. I say that constructively to the Minister. I think that we have heard from around the chamber that this is an area that all parties would like to see movement on. I hope that the Minister will share that and perhaps outline it briefly. As he mentioned planning, does he agree that we really need to properly resource our planning authorities? There has been around a 20 per cent reduction in the planning workforce, and some of the technical skills that we have heard about tonight are really, really important. Does he agree that we have to support local government? I should have said that at the start apologies, and we also had to leave before the end. I thank you for your permission on that. I thank Monica Lennon for that constructive intervention, and I do agree. I say this as a former chairman of the Murray Council planning committee. It was a role that I thoroughly enjoyed and one that is hugely important, but those are complex issues. To ensure that members have the best possible information to determine applications, it is right that we have the full support and the backing of officers. Finally, my last couple of seconds, I want to mention a very good briefing that we all received ahead of today's debate about skills, because, as well as the changes to permitted development and NDR, skills have come up. I want to give the final word, if I can, to a constituent of mine, Josh King, who works for AES Solar, who is the Solar Energy Scotland vice chair. His words are really important. The potential for solar in Scotland is huge, but a clear ambition and stable policy are vital to capitalise on the opportunity. Solar can be rapidly deployed at all scales, and the recent surge in demand, which we expect to continue, is already leading to a serious skills gap. We need to focus on skilled apprenticeships, as well as upskilling and retraining those transitioning from traditional energy and engineering industries. The roles are ready and waiting. Those are words that I hope we all agree with in this chamber, and the minister can respond to in summing up. Thanks to Fergus Ewing for bringing forward the debate tonight. As co-convener of the CPG on renewable energy, I am delighted to see our renewable sector continue to grow in strength. I am delighted to see the Solar Energy Scotland policy paper, Scotland's fair share, Scotland's own Cheven Net Zero and Scotland being published. That was the paper that Douglas Ross mentioned. It is only yesterday that we have seen the proposed energy cap rise to £2,800. We need to scale up our renewables capability as quick as we can. I am going to declare an interest to 11 Dunbar, sunny Dunney, as it is known. Officially, this sunny is placed in Scotland, so I am claiming the national headquarters for Dunbar. In the report, Solar Energy Scotland calls on the Scottish Government to commit to a minimum target of 4 gigawatts of solar energy across the country by 2030 and declare, as we have heard before, a level 11 ambition of 6 gigawatts. We have heard at the forecast that there are 6 gigawatts with 3.5 gigawatts of deployment from ground mounted solar, 1.5 gigawatts from domestic rooftops and 1 gigawatt from commercial rooftops. 12 years ago in 2010, when I was councillor in East Lothian, we submitted plans for a £10 million investment in solar plans in our council buildings. Unfortunately, there was a change in administration and he did not go forward with the proposals at that stage. Local authorities need to lead on that. Solar Energy Scotland further stated that a specific solar deployment target of 4 to 6 gigawatts would ensure that solar technologies deliver their fair share of the clean energy required for Scotland to achieve its leading in legally binding commitments to 2030 on a way to a net zero economy by 2045. In the minister's winding up tonight, it would be good to see if he could comment on the policy asks in the paper indeed if the Scottish Government would support an independent Scottish solar strategy. The solar energy paper sets out the policy asks. It is asking for a formal minimal target of 4 gigawatts and 6 target upper ambition by 2030, as I have mentioned. We have heard about the building regulations, which I think is incredibly important. Planning rules again extending up to 5 megawatts rooftop solar projects, and we have heard again non-demester rates supporting a green recovery by exempting on-site solar and storage from non-demestic rates. The one other key thing to mention tonight is investment in natural capital. Farmers and landowners should be permitted to claim under the basic payment scheme for solar projects and agricultural land, where they can meet natural capital and biodiversity objectives. Grid infrastructure costs should spread the cost of electricity grid reinforcement between solar, energy storage and wind generation technologies. The paper mentions the broader benefits, which are moved towards a just transition. The solar energy power sector can create resilient, long-term and sustainable jobs. Solar energy Scotland analysis suggests that deploying 6 gigawatts of solar in Scotland could support at least 3,000 full-time equivalent, skilled and high-quality jobs, with the potential for many more throughout the supply chain and the wider economy part to support. There is major job creation potential on the emerging energy storage also. I am fortunate enough to have Sunamp in my area, an innovative battery storage company, recently supported by the Scottish National Investment Bank, so there are real opportunities for that sector to grow also. Solar and storage technology also has the ability to be quick to deploy. Committing to a Scottish solar deployment target would therefore mean that the Scottish Government could rapidly deliver skilled, high-job quality jobs in rural and other parts of the country in weeks rather than in years. Solar also has the potential to provide employment for North East offshore workers and from decommissioning, for example, of Tornes in my area. The sector needs to support vocational and training support from the Government. Solar can also expand our industrial sector. Scotland has an established solar supply chain involving a wide range of companies, now the work in design, manufacture, distribution, project development and so on. There is a real opportunity to expand the supply chain further. Solar and Energy Scotland estimates that deploying four gigawatts would lead to around £2.5 billion of economic activity, as a minimum in areas that are mentioned above. Supporting the sector sends out a very clear signal to Scottish companies that they would have confidence to invest in the workforce and operations, expanding the supply chain and helping to diversify the Scottish economy and also reduces the pressure on the grid. Solar Energy recommends that a move to a smarter, more decentralised system of power of generation and use. That means maximising potential for local on-site generation. In conclusion, Scotland has major solar resource potential. Policy decisions in the next few months and years can provide the confidence for the investment that is needed in the sector and the impetus for skills agencies, colleges and universities to prepare the skills base to move the sector forward. Having already met Solar Energy Scotland, I look forward to continuing to work with it to maximise the opportunity for the sector, building on an incredible renewable success story in Scotland. I join with other members in congratulating Fergus Ewing for bringing this debate. The level of interest and enthusiasm for the topic that has been shown by members across the chamber is an extremely positive indication. The Scottish Government has of course been very clear that the climate emergency is the biggest threat that our world faces. We must set right the terrible mistakes of previous generations and rapidly transition away from fossil fuels, slash our emissions and prevent the catastrophic impacts of climate change from threatening not only human civilisation but the rest of the living world around us. Scotland is taking leading action to combat climate change, with emissions already down by more than 50 per cent by 2019, although we have much more to do if we are going to make up for recent missed targets. The energy transition is of course a critical part of that. Last year, Scotland generated enough renewable electricity to power all households in Scotland for almost three years. However, the scale of the challenge means that we have much more to do. The Scottish Government is taking action through our Scotland wind announcement, our onshore wind policy statement and our commitment to measures such as active travel and reducing car kilometres. However, it is also crucial that we do not repeat other mistakes of the past and ensure a managed and fair transition to net zero. On solar, the Scottish Government recognises the great importance of energy generated from solar in contributing to the decarbonisation of Scotland's energy supply, which is helping us to reach net zero by 2045. I have no doubt that solar will play an important and a growing role in our decarbonisation goals. It has the potential to lower costs for individuals and communities as well. On that point, it is a very important point, and hopefully there will be many people watching who are very interested in joining us on the solar journey. Does the Scottish Government offer any financial support so that people can access it? If not, might you consider whether that is possible? I will be coming on to that in the speech. We currently have around 400 megawatts of solar PV operational in Scotland, and in 2020 it generated 353 gigawatt-hours of electricity. As of June last year, there were the further 352 megawatts of projects in the pipeline. Solar is growing, and I hear very clearly the appetite from across the chamber for us to support it to grow faster. Solar is a versatile technology. It interacts well with other renewables. For example, it is playing a key role in off-grid communities such as Fair Isle, where £1.5 million of Scottish Government funding helps to fund electricity generation based on three wind turbines, solar and battery storage. That has provided the island with 24-hour electricity for the first time. We are keen to understand more about what solar can do, so we are currently undertaking research, which will be published this year, to examine the extent to which building-level storage can help to reduce household energy costs. It is not specific to solar alone, but it will look at pairing solar PV with storage. On funding, the Scottish Government offers a number of support mechanisms to enable the deployment of solar, and that is already helping consumers and communities to reduce their carbon emissions and their energy bills. Those schemes also recognise the potential for decarbonisation, not only of electricity but of heat. For example, the Scottish Government's social housing net zero heat fund is supporting social landlords across Scotland to install air-source heat pumps alongside solar panels and battery storage. The combination of the three technologies helps to reduce carbon emissions and to reduce bills. It also smooths out demand, reducing potential strain on the network and makes homes more resilient to potential power outages. It combines all those benefits in the way that Mark Ruskell described, and it has great potential. I agree with what Mark Ruskell said. Would he address some of the specific asks that I included in the speech that I notified of him of yesterday? In particular, the need for swift action and the desirability of adopting the measures of England to enable, typically without planning permission, rooftop solar would really allow us to make swift progress. I wonder if that is in the minister's plans. I am aware that the planning minister has met Solar Energy Scotland, and I am sure that they would have raised that issue. I am responding as the minister responsible for zero-carbon buildings, but the planning minister, the cabinet secretary for NSF and others are actively engaged in this agenda. To give another couple of examples of where the work is already taking place, Dumfries and Galloway housing partnership is installing similar measures to the combined technologies that are described in 100 of their off-gas homes, replacing inefficient and carbon-intensive heating. Those tenants are expected to benefit from a reduction of up to 60 per cent in their energy bills, something that people around the country facing the cost of living crisis would hopefully see as evidence that that transition can be made to work in people's interests. In terms of communities, the Scottish Government's community and local energy scheme provides funding and special advice for communities taking forward similar projects. For example, the example noted by Colin Smyth, which is provided £100,000 to Edinburgh's community solar co-operative, which saw solar PV installed across 24 public buildings owned by the City of Edinburgh Council, along with battery storage. All the additional income generated from those solar panels is allocated into a local community benefit fund, helping to ensure that there is lasting economic and social benefit for those communities. In all of those ways, solar renewable projects can be used in conjunction with other technologies to maximise efficiency and benefit. Starling Council has been installing solar PV under their social housing since 2012, and the Scottish Government has helped the programme with additional funding under the decarminisation fund for social housing and funding from the area-based schemes. That has provided over 4,200 installations to date, installing 40,000 solar panels in the Starling area, providing an average annual savering of £100 per household. The council is now also installing battery storage alongside the PV, giving additional savings. Members have emphasised some UK measures such as grid connection costs, and the cabinet secretary met with Ofgem again just today to make that case once again. In conclusion, Scotland has huge potential for solar energy, and I thank, once again, Fergus Ewing for raising the issue in the chamber. I am very pleased by the strong appetite that there is for faster action. The Scottish Government is working with the solar industry. We welcome the work that it has done and the proposals that it has put to us, and our officials are engaging with that. Permitted development rights are correct under review, and I will make sure that the planning minister is clear about the strength of appetite from across the chamber for that action to be taken forward as quickly as possible. As committed in the Bute House agreement, we plan to publish an updated solar version detailing our future objectives as part of the energy strategy refresh that is due later this year. We will continue to work with the industry and members from across the chamber as that action is developed. However, the strength of view that has been expressed has been heard very clearly and will be at the forefront of our minds as we complete that work in the coming months. Thank you Minister. That concludes the debate, and I close this meeting.