 Thank you. That concludes the Ministerial statement on deposit return scheme. My apologies to those members I was unable to reach but I am conscious of the need to protect time for the next item of business, which is a debate on motion 9339, in the name of Liam Kerr, on a thriving future for Scotland's oil and gas sector and its workers. I will allow a moment or two for benches to reconfigure. Can I invite all members who wish to speak yn adeiladau i ddwell yn hyfforddiolio i ei ddwell i ddwell yn cyfryd. Dysgwyl am yr enw i Liam Kerr, i ddigonlu i grawb ei ddweud eich bobl, mawr dod—y ryw pofyn gwneud ym nôl yn ei ddweud i ddweud i ddweud, i adeiladau i ddweud i ddweud. Mae'n cynghwil iawn, dyn nhw, wrth unrhyw sy'n gwych gwych yn ddweud. Gwyrddiaeth arall ym ensi am ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud. that's already declining, even with new fields. We have 24 million homes heated by gas-boilers. Oil and gas provided over 90% of Scotland's heat demand in 2020. 32 million vehicles rely on petrol and diesel. Oil and gas produces plastic medical equipment which our hospitals use to save lives. We use it to make fertilisers for our farmers to grow the crops that feed us. newid gydaeth i chi i fynd i ddweud eich taff y prosiectu a gswod y gallai tyfnod a'i cyfrwyl o'r dod? A yr embod peth yn olygu'r gweithio bwyllfa ar gyfer y cyfryd, y cyfrydd hwn yn hyn nhw ymgyrchol iawn, beth yn ybydd i bule byrd y bwlyth i 15 miliwn i'ch cyffref i hyn yn brongofynu i gael i'r cerdd iawn. Rwy'r cyffref yma'r gweithio eich cyfryd yn cyfryd i'r geithwylarом yn 2050, oedd yn eich gweithio gen i ni, mwy brws. Bydd o'r 20-30s, oedden o'r gasol yn ei ddweud 50% o gwaith energiol. Fy gyd, mae'n gwybod i'r gwaith o'r newid yn amlwg o'r cyfrifiadau yn ymgyrchol, sy'n gwybod i'r gwaith o'r gwaith o'r gwaith energiol. Mae'n ddimand ymlaen i'r gwaith, ac yn fwy o'r gwaith, mae'n gwybod i'r gwaith o'r gwaith. Daniel Johnson. Daniel Johnson. Mae'n gwybod i'r gwaith, ond mae'n gwybod i'r gwaith. yn ddigwydd. Mae gyda'n ddegwydd i gyd yn gwyllwch h若edd gyda'n gyd yn hyd i rwasiaf, i gael eu cyfwyr cyfwyr. Rydw i'n ganddo'r cyfwyr i gael y sydd yn gwneud o wneud o gwaith y economie Unigol, mae'r cyfwyr yn 280,000 mewn o'r 90,000. Yn 95% mewn, mae eich sydd yn ddigwydd i y sefydlach yn y dilig o gwneudio mewn gwnaeth o'r tyg. Os yw gwneud o gael y newid ysbyg oherwydd mae'n gwneud eich gwirionedd i'n ei wneud, mae rhan oedd yn eu gwirionedd 6 billion pounds by 2030, in a second, Gilliam Martin. So it is imperative also to note that ending the industry early will lead to higher energy bills, as the Institute of Economic Affairs said, which is why, when Labour launched what Gary Smith of the GMB described as a stupid and catastrophic policy that they would ban new North Sea developments, people were stunned. They asked how on earth could a prospective party of government seriously put forward a policy that Smith described as economically utterly incoherent. Indeed, the GMB's Scotland Secretary called it naive, unnecessary and self-harming. Perhaps that can be explained by the UK Labour Party's ignorance, but that doesn't explain why Scottish Labour winds in behind this madness. Leaving aside that Anas Sarwar hasn't even had the courtesy to acknowledge, let alone reply to my letter, he was on representing border just yesterday, backing the ban on new developments. If there is any doubt about Scottish Labour's position, remember Monica Lennon lodged a motion last November stating that no new oil and gas licences should be approved. It is signed by current spokesperson Sarah Boyack, Carol Mocken, Alex Rowley, Paul Sweeney, Mercedes Villalba and Martin Whitfield. I'll take an intervention from Gillian Martin. Gillian Martin, I take the point about demand. It is an important point when there is demand for something that we can't supply, but I'd like to ask Liam Kerr with regard to demand what the UK Government's plans to decarbonise the gas grid. The UK Government is talking, as we've heard in the net zero committee, huge plans to decarbonise, which is why we have the intog round, which is why the off-gem has just had a new net zero duty. There are huge developments going on, as Gillian Martin, as an energy minister, really ought to know. And the SNP really have got a similar problem to Labour, because they have a presumption against new oil and gas in their energy strategy. Last month, they wheeled out the First Minister to give some warm words to the industry. They also wheeled out Gillian Martin, Mary McCallan and Jackie Dunbar, all quoted in similarly ambiguous terms. But the people of Scotland can see the presumption is retained in the amendment by Neil Gray today. This is the party of Nicola Sturgeon, who was so opposed to Campbell, of Minister Paul MacLennan, who also signed Monica Lennon's motion. Of Mary McCallan, who, on 5 January, was reported as saying, we do not agree with the UK Government issuing new oil and gas licences. And Neil Gray, the energy cabinet secretary, who in committee last month both refused to back new oil and gas development in North Sea, then said, this is not an area I have responsibility for. They must think that the north-east is buttoned up the back. The people of Scotland know that if the decision on granting licences for new projects was not reserved to Westminster, the SNP would be forced by their coalition with the Greens to block every application. The Greens, who sit next to them in government, whose Patrick Harvie claimed that supporting oil and gas makes one hard right. Presiding Officer, there isn't time to develop the point that, actually, what will drive net zero is the current North Sea industry. With these businesses, for example, helping to develop 13 gigawatts of offshore wind capacity by 2030 through £30 billion worth of investment, other speakers will no doubt pick this up. Presiding Officer, we have a choice, a choice between UK-produced oil and gas and imported from countries with weaker regulatory regimes and emissions targets and unstable politics and exporting our jobs. As Unite General Secretary Sharon Graham said of Labour's plans, grabbing the headlines is easy. Developing a serious plan for more renewable energy is not out of time, Mr Johnson. She's correct, and neither Labour nor the SNP Green coalition has that plan. The only party with a credible plan to work with our oil and gas industry and renewable sectors to get to net zero whilst keeping the lights on, our homes warm and the economy moving without losing the skills and experience needed to deliver the energy transition is the Scottish Conservatives. That's why I have pleasure in moving the motion in my name. I now call on Neil Gray to speak to a move amendment 9.339.3 up to six minutes, cabinet secretary. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I move the amendment in my name. The Scottish Government is absolutely committed to a just transition and ensuring we take workers with us on our journey to net zero. For the Scottish Government, the transition is both the outcome, a fairer greener future for all, and the process that must be undertaken in partnership with those impacted by the transition to net zero. The first transition supports a net zero and climate resilient economy in a way that delivers fairness and tackles inequality and injustice. We will not do to the north-east what Margaret Thatcher did to our mining and steel communities when people and places were callously discarded and jobs promised that were never delivered. The impact of that thoughtless de-industrialisation is still being felt decades on by communities that I represent in air-draight and shots. The oil and gas sector, particularly the skills, talent and experience in the north-east, must play a critical role in supporting the build-out of low-carbon technologies in Scotland. We cannot ignore the fact that there is a climate emergency, which is why we have been clear that unlimited extraction of fossil fuels is not consistent with Scotland's ambitious climate obligations and our focus must now be on a planned and fair transition that leaves no one behind. That means simply stopping all future activity is wrong. That could threaten energy security while destroying the very skills that we need to transition to the new low-carbon economy. Neither can we put our heads in the sand, as the Conservative Party seems determined to do, and behave as though the North Sea contains an endless supply of oil and gas that is cheap and easy to produce. Oil and gas workers know how challenging conditions are offshore and energy companies know how rapidly it is maturing. It is irresponsible of the Conservative Party to suggest otherwise. Their approach risks the economic future of the north-east, would expose us to higher energy prices and compromises our energy security. They do not want a transition. Instead, we as a party of government are acting responsibly. We are facing squarely up to the challenges and planning a managed transition that supports the workers and communities of the north-east and all of Scotland, rather than the cliff edge that Gary Smith from the GMB described as a result of Labour's plans for oil and gas. Scotland has the skills, talent and natural resources with which to become a global renewables powerhouse. Our draft energy strategy and just transition plan, which was published on 10 January, sets out our vision to achieve that, an energy system that delivers affordable, resilient and clean energy supplies. That will not only enhance our energy security through the use and development of our own resources but means that we generate enough cheap green electricity to power Scotland's economy and to export electricity to our neighbours, supporting jobs here in Scotland and decarbonising our ambitions of our partners. I am grateful to understand the Government's current position on the Rose Bank licence, which we know sits with the UK Government. Will the Rose Bank licence, if approved, is that going to help or hinder the just transition that we need? It is not a transition, it is a just transition for workers and communities. It is a pity that Liam Kerr will not take the intervention but I would love to get some clarity from the Scottish Government because I did right to Humza Yousaf ahead of his meeting with the Prime Minister and there was no response. Communities deserve better than that. We have said very clearly that any future exploration in oil and gas production in the North Sea needs to pass much more stringent at climate compatibility tests. That is critically important. We have already said that the unlimited extraction of oil and gas in the North Sea is not compatible with our net zero targets. We have just finished consulting and we are currently deliberating over the responses that we have received to the energy strategy and just transition plan, which will set out a confirmation later this year in terms of our policy framework going forward. That plan lays out over 150 actions, as well as consulting on further actions to help to maximise a just transition to net zero for our communities, businesses and workers. We are already doing the hard work of supporting the just transition, ensuring that it is not only just but as swift as possible. The Scottish Government sees offshore wind as being one of the most important economic and net zero opportunities we have. Our operational, under construction, consented and in planning projects, together with the market ambitions expressed in Scotland and in Togleasing rounds, now sets our renewable electricity potential pipeline at over 40 gigawatts. That could produce enough electricity annually to power every home in Scotland for 17 years. In order to unlock all those potential developments, we must build on our robust offshore wind planning programme to address the challenges going forward. There is a clear need for significant new network investment to ensure that our infrastructure does not become a barrier to net zero. While we welcome off GEM's recent decision to accelerate the approval of strategic transmission infrastructure, the UK Government needs to take action to provide the right powers to the Scottish Government that will enable us to modernise the planning and consenting system for grid infrastructure. Unfortunately, in that regard, while we have the energy, we do not have the power. We expect, in terms of the supply chain coming through, we expect the Scotland wind developers to invest an average of £1.4 billion in Scotland per project into our economy across the 20 offshore wind projects. We need to support our offshore wind developers as they meet their supply chain commitments. The minister must conclude. I am very sorry that the debate is so short and we have such a small amount of time in order to debate these issues because I had much more that I wanted to say, not least in response to what came through from the Conservative party. To conclude, the rhetoric over the recent weeks has demonstrated that it appears that the Tories appear not to want a transition and Keir Starmer's Labour Party appears not to want a just transition. The Tories have no regard for the planet. Labour has no regard for the workers. I am asking you to conclude, Minister, so please resume your seat. I now call on a Sarah Boyack to speak to and move amendment 9339.2. Today's motion from the Tories is the height of hypocrisy, so I move the amendment in my name. The Tories have been in power since 2010 and have presided over rising energy bills, but when it has come to the vital infrastructure and political support needed to develop the renewables transformation that we urgently need across the UK, successive energy ministers have dithered and delayed. It has to be a just transition. It has to be about planning ahead for both the short and the long term, bringing together our energy industries using the skills and the leadership and the workers of those already in the oil and gas sector, but also in the critical supply chains and in developing the new manufacturing jobs and innovation that our universities are currently working on that will enable us to deliver on our net zero ambitions. There has been a lot of inaccurate speculation over the last few days, so it's important to get the facts right, not the rumours on which the Conservative motion is based and Liam Kerr's desperate speech this afternoon. Scottish Labour is absolutely not turning the taps off now. We are working. We are working in the sector, and that is not what Keir Starmer has said on any occasion, nor indeed anas Sauer. We will work with the sector and the workers in that sector to ensure that the just transition starts now using our existing oil and gas fields that we have and maximising their effectiveness as we follow the commitments made at COP26 in Glasgow to play our part in tackling the climate crisis that our world now faces. We are in a global race to net zero, and we are seeing none of the ambition, the forward planning and the strategic investment that our global partners like the USA are now moving ahead with at pace. The Tories are in serious danger, as was said by the cabinet secretary, of doing what they did to the miners and mining communities under Thatcher. Those communities are still suffering. We need to learn that lesson. Oh, I will take a minor intervention. I think that the member needs to address the point that Gary Smith of the GMP said that the Labour plan lacks intellectual rigor. Who is right, Gary Smith or Keir Starmer? I have to say that it is Keir Starmer and our Sauer, Edmila Bant working with the trade unions. I am going to come back to this because it is about serious investment in the way that we would lead in green manufacturing. The £28 billion that Edmila Bant is talking about with Rachel Reeves every year for a decade will bring our trade unions on board, because they will see those jobs from day one, but we need that investment now. We have renewables projects in a queue because we do not have grid capacity. That is totally unacceptable. A grid was incidentally designed that does not address the scale of change and the new renewables that we urgently need now. 13 years on from the Tories taking power, they have not delivered on the renewables opportunities that we have seen developed in Scotland. I am proud of the work that we did from the start of the Parliament to set what were then seen as radical targets. However, it is also bitterly disappointing that we have not seen the work by the SNP to make sure that our communities benefit from that renewables investment, whether it is the missed opportunities with Scotland or the lack of support for our councils to power ahead on delivering municipal heat and power networks and jobs and lowering bills. Jobs are critical to that. However, as the STUC said in response to the vacuous Scottish Government energy strategy and just transition consultation, it falls dramatically short of addressing the crisis that is faced by working people. The trade union-led just transition partnership said that it is imperative that we have a strategy that meets our climate demands and ensure poverty. Instead, we have a restatement of existing policies. On the most important matters, it asks questions rather than taking positions. We need action now, and it is not good enough from either the Tories or the SNP, because we have not had the focus on the jobs that we need in our communities, bringing people's existing gas and electricity costs down. That means investing in retrofitting our homes and our buildings, developing heat and power networks that deliver real community benefits. I will indeed. Ms Boyack is in her last 30 seconds. I'll be very brief. On the jobs, does she accept the £200 million investment that is coming to Scotland from Sumitomo will bring 150 jobs? It's just the start of the supply chain pipeline that is coming from Scotland. Sarah Boyack. It's nowhere near ambitious enough, and that's the difference with Labour's green prosperity plan. It will deliver the jobs and the investment in Scotland at scale that we need now. Value for money to taxpayers. It will deliver energy security going forward, a partnership between government, business and workers. Developing low-carbon renewables, solar, wind wave and tidal, using all the resources in our existing oil and gas fields and the skills of our oil and gas workforce in Grangemouth, we cannot fall behind. The 35% of our households living in fuel poverty need action now. We need to get moving. I now fall on to Liam McArthur. Up to four minutes, please, Mr McArthur. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Today's debate mirrors one we had about 18 months ago now, as then we need to start by acknowledging that maximum extraction is not an option. Oil and gas resources will have to be left in the ground. At the same time, the motion is right to point to the current contribution of the oil and gas sector to our energy system, our economy and the tens of thousands of jobs across the country, though notably in regions such as the north-east and highlands and islands. When we talk about a just transition, we must accept that that will look different in different parts of the country. In my own Orkney constituency, as the cabinet secretary will well know, the flota terminal has been integral to our island economy and community, as well as at a national level for almost half a century. The terminal has seen many changes over that time, as the sector has matured. There is even talk of a potential green hydrogen plant being located on the site linked to the proposed west of Orkney offshore wind project. That illustrates the sort of transition that we need to see, but it also underscores the complexity, the sensitivity and the tailored nature of that transition. It is worth reminding ourselves that the UK climate change committee scenarios anticipate oil and gas accounting for between 47 per cent and 54 per cent of total cumulative energy demand between 2020 and 2050. There is no doubt that a marked reduction is significant and a warning of the need to bear down on demand, but it also avoids simply displacing domestic production with imports that are more environmentally damaging and create their own security of supply issues. In terms of those working in the sector, there is ample evidence of their willingness, indeed appetite, to be part of the energy transition. While there are certainly transferable skills between oil and gas and renewables, that is not always the case. Government and agencies must therefore do more to raise awareness of options and make the transfer, including any retraining and skills development, as easy and as smooth as possible. This is a point made in my own amendment, but thankfully also one made in Cereboyax, as well as in the WWF briefing for this debate. It is also self-evident that any just transition will require both Scotland's Governments to play their full, active and collaborative part alongside local government. The UK CCC were unequivocal on this point. Bluntly, this cannot be yet another issue that gets sucked into a self-reinforcing and ultimately self-defeating arm wrestle over the constitution. Neil Gray is right to challenge UK ministers over support for the Scottish cluster in development of carbon capture, usage and storage. At the same time, he also needs to acknowledge his own Government's consistent failure to meet its climate targets. Its inability to detail the action that it believes will get us on track to meet those targets. That detail, for example, would be helpful in relation to the energy transition fund, for example. What are the objectives in year 1 for the £20 million? How many workers will benefit and in what ways? What are the predicted investments going forward in future years? We need that detail to address both the calls from the UK Climate Change Committee, but also to avoid the impression that this is more smoke and mirrors. Key to a just transition is the creation of new green jobs. We cannot afford to leave people and communities behind. Achieving that will require plans that are radical, credible and lock in genuine collaboration between UK, Scottish and local government, as well as the affected sectors. As I said in the previous debate back in 2021, on this issue, change is unavoidable, but only with detailed plans and proper resourcing can this be done in a managed and, most importantly, a just way. Thank you, Mr MacArthur. We will now move to the open debate. I would remind members that it is speeches of up to four minutes. We do not have any time in hand, and, although members are absolutely entitled to choose or not to take interventions, any interventions must be absorbed within the member's allocated speaking time. On that, I call Jamie Halcro Johnston to be followed by Audrey Nicholl. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I am pleased to be able to speak in this important debate and to be able to remind members that, while our oil and gas sector is one vital to the north-east, it is one that has played and continues to play an important role across my highlands and islands region. Yesterday, if I had looked out of the window of my home overlooking Scapaflow and Orkney, I would have seen the tanker, a rare tear, birthed at the Flotter Oil terminal, the Pacific Ineos Grenadier at Anker and the Eagle Balder and Pacific Treasures involved in a ship-to-ship transfer supported by local tugs Freia, Thor and Odin. I would have seen the platform, the safe Caledonia, now a familiar site in the flow. One of my earliest memories of Orkney from 1979 was of an oil rig in Scapaflow. That was at the start of the oil boom, and throughout the last four decades, the oil has flowed through Flotter. The tankers, including some of the largest in the world, have been regular visitors. The oil industry is a vital part of Orkney's economy, providing well-paid and highly skilled jobs and supporting a wider supply chain. It has a GVA of 110 million and supports 167 direct jobs and 279 indirect jobs, with those in turn supporting at least the further 175 local jobs in the islands. And the supply chain includes many businesses that also support Orkney's growing renewable sector, the two highly skilled, highly successful industries working hand in hand, complementing each other, not in competition, as some might have you believe. Across the highlands and islands, according to offshore energies UK, the sector has a GVA of 209 million and supports the jobs of more than one and a half thousand people. And it was in the highlands at yards, such as Ardysia, Kishorn and Nigg, that the oil boom was facilitated, building the rigs that extracted the oil. And Chromaty Firthport has been a vital facility too, and will continue to be, as the opportunities of the Green Freeport, created by both the UK and Scottish Governments working together, are taken. And of course, the sector is one vital to Shetland, where the Silomvo terminal and the Shetland gas plant are still both major employers, and where decommissioning at Loic Port Authority's Dellsvo facility is well established, a site I visited on a number of occasions. But the opportunities for Shetland and for the wider highlands and islands are not in the past. According to Wood MacKenzie's 2018 report, the west of Shetland is the place to be, with abundant oil and gas reserves. There are opportunities for decades to come, not just to support the local jobs in Shetland and the wider sector, but to help the United Kingdom meet its energy needs. And that's vital, because oil and gas will continue to play a part in our energy mix for years to come. And by ending domestic production early, we risk making the United Kingdom more reliant on more polluting foreign imports and at a cost of £1,100 to every person by 2030. But that seems to be a price worth paying for some in this chamber. Desperate to be seen to be doing something virtuous regardless of the damaging consequences. We know that the green tail is now wagging the yellow SMP dog, and they are now too fit to stand up to their militant green bedfellows. What a stand up for Scotland's oil and gas workers. But Labour have no such excuse. And by talking up ending domestic production for good, Scottish Labour appear to be willing to let down the Scottish workers and the communities that depend on our oil and gas sector. And they are joining this opposition to be developed by the Liberal Democrats who are failing to stand up for those in the constituencies they currently represent. The Scottish Conservatives value our oil and gas sector, and with new opportunities in exploration, the vital role can continue to play in the years to come. We will always stand up for the industry, for the workers who rely on it, for their employment and for the communities it supports. Thank you, Mr Harper-Johnson. I now call Audrey Nicholl to be followed by Martin Whitfield. Thank you. For over half a century our offshore energy sector has been an essential part of our economic and environmental prosperity, and it has ensured secure energy supplies across the UK. However, in their just transition review of the Scottish energy sector, EY forecast a marked and continued decline in North Sea oil and gas production with around 80 per cent from already sanctioned fields and less than 20 per cent from new developments. New discoveries will be smaller and harder to extract. EY also reports that the industry supports 57,000 jobs in Scotland and is responsible for £16 billion of GVA or 9 per cent of total Scottish GDP. That contribution will reduce as the decline continues. The term just transition refers to a fair distribution of burden and benefits of the transition to a low-carbon economy that tends to be used in the context of workers. The 2021 Robert Gordon University Offshore Energy Workforce Transferability Review highlights that around 200,000 skilled people are likely to be required to support activities in the UK offshore energy sector. Over 90 per cent of the oil and gas workforce have medium to high-skills transferability and are well positioned to work in adjacent energy sectors. Around 50 per cent of the jobs in 2030 are projected to be filled by people transferring from oil and gas jobs to offshore renewable roles, new graduates and new recruitment from outside the existing UK offshore energy sector. I commend the Scottish Government's support of the development of the skills passport proposed in the report. The draft energy strategy and just transition plan sets out the future energy pathway for Scotland, including offshore wind. Earlier this week, I visited the sea green offshore wind farm, a joint venture that will deliver the world's deepest fixed offshore wind farm later this year. In the 10 or so minutes that we were alongside a turbine being assembled, the nacell or cog was lifted from the wind orca jack-up vessel onto the tower, demonstrating the pace of progress, but crucially using not only a blended workforce, but also recycled assets, including the sea greens operation base, formerly home to an oil and gas company in Aberdeen. Of course, there is still much to do. The RGU Energy Institute report, making the switch, highlights that to grow the industry in the northeast will require rapid and targeted investment. Getting this right has the potential to secure the region's economy as a global energy hub. However, if we move too slowly, we risk a hard-hitting economic decline, and I hear that on a regular basis in my engagement with the sector, and I agree that that must be avoided at all costs. There is absolutely no doubt about the Scottish Government's commitment to net zero, and I was pleased to hear the detail on that in the cabinet secretary's contribution earlier on. However, I would still seek reassurance on timescales as I set out earlier. Finally, a debate on oil and gas cannot pass without referencing the hundreds of billions of pounds that have flowed from the sector to the UK treasury. It is deeply disappointing, therefore, in light of that contribution, that the UK Government chooses not to match the Scottish government's £500 million just transition contribution to the vital work within the sector. I am very grateful to the Deputy Presiding Officer, and it is indeed a pleasure to follow Audrey Nicholle and, indeed, to participate in this debate. I welcome the first part of Liam Kerr's motion about the Parliament recognising the vital role that oil and gas plays in Scotland's energy mix and in supporting tens of thousands of Scottish jobs, particularly in the northeast. Indeed, Liam Kerr was right to speak about the demand and the need in part to control and service that demand because we know that, where people lose their power, it becomes a frightening experience for them in this day and age, perhaps even more so than if we went back to the 70s and the three-day week. Let me help Liam Kerr with something about his request about the north sea's developing future. The north sea will not be turned off today or tomorrow or, indeed, in the future decades because of what is already out there. Out there, I don't talk about that stuff that sits under the ground, but I talk about the skills, the brilliance, the imagination and the entrepreneurial skills of all of those workers supported by strong trade unions who are fighting to ensure that they do not go through the history of the mining communities and the industrial communities did under Margaret Thatcher. We have heard about the need to transition into a green technology, a green-based economy, and we need to do so for many reasons. First and foremost, of course, because of the planet and the fact that we owe our young generation a future in which they can live and contribute, and enjoy the same good things that we have today without having to hand over too much. In order to do that—I'm sorry, I'm— Thank you, Minister. Quickly. I thank Martin Whitfield for giving way. He's performing an admirable job in performing a Scottish Labour reverse ferret on the UK Labour's position that was pushed out. Does he regret the fact that Jonathan Reynolds said that the UK Labour would stop new oil and gas production? I'm grateful for that intervention because good faith suggests that one should welcome intervention because that's the purpose of debate. But let us talk about the previous 13 years, where particularly over the last few years we've seen rising energy prices, we've seen families concerned about how they heat their home, how they feed their home, and that is the responsibility of two Governments—one that sits down south and one that sits up here in Scotland. No, I'm not going to go back on what Jonathan Reynolds has said, nor am I going to apply to it the cliff edge that people have spoken about because the Labour Party, both north and south of the border, are here to defend our communities, and that includes how they get energy, where they get food, and the quality of their housing. It is about looking after those people who, at the minute, are working out in the North Sea on our oil rigs and allowing them to transition to highly skilled jobs. I compliment Neil Gray on his comment with regard to the grid because what we need to look at is the fundamental supply of power and energy across the United Kingdom and we need to do that in a developing, logical and technological way. It is the Labour Party that will invest in that. It is the Labour Party that will allow that. Neil Gray is right in previous debates who have raised the number of energy projects that are stalled at the moment because they can't connect to the grid. Our communities need a good power source, and it allows me, in the incredibly short time that I have left, to raise what I always do, which is in the importance of the nuclear sector and providing a base load for that. Indeed, if we look at Tornes within my own constituency, that has produced enough low-carbon electricity to save the equivalent of 84.8 million tonnes of CO2, that would take every passenger car off the road for over a year. I am grateful to Deputy Prime Minister. I now call Maurice Golden to be followed by Emma Harper. Thank you, Deputy Prime Minister. Burning fossil fuels is the biggest source of global carbon emissions. We have to tackle that to deliver net zero. At the same time, there is no point in pretending that oil and gas will not be an important part of our economy for decades to come. The task then is not just to reduce demand but to ensure that the supply is as low as possible. That is the practical approach that gets us to net zero whilst protecting jobs and giving our communities a future. Those of us with the privilege of representing the north-east know how important that is. Oil and gas supports around 90,000 jobs in Scotland and a significant proportion are in the north-east. That is people providing for their families, spending their pay packets in local businesses and contributing almost 10 per cent of Scotland's GDP. Attempts to fast-track an end to the sector can only inflict unnecessary harm on those workers, their communities and Scotland as a whole. That is why reducing demand must come alongside a just transition. The renewables sector is one obvious route. A recent report from Robert Gordon University found that 90 per cent of oil and gas workers have medium to high-skilled transferability and are well placed to work in adjacent energy sectors. I welcome the UK Government joining other north-sea nations to commit to quadrupling offshore wind generation by the end of the decade. Decommissioning has great potential too. The north-sea transition authority estimates annual spend will rise to £2.5 billion per year over the next two decades, on top of which is the opportunity to cycle critical minerals, especially from renewables, back into the economy. It all adds up to helping to sustain jobs and supply chains. However, oil and gas workers face barriers, such as having their skills recognised in other sectors, the cost of retraining and the lack of information on opportunities to do so. It is welcome then that reskilling is one of the goals of the UK Government's north-sea transition deal, alongside efforts to help the oil and gas sector to reduce emissions. As I have noted before, those efforts would be helped by electrifying oil and gas platforms, such as through tying them into offshore wind platforms, and further lowering the carbon intensity of north-sea production, which is already below the global average. No one is serious about net zero should be arguing for higher carbon imports, a policy that could actually spur greater output from more carbon-intensive basins. The public agrees. A recent poll found that 75 per cent of people want their demand met from domestic supply. Not the Greens though, they want our oil and gas sector shut down as quickly as possible. The SNP is not far behind them backing a presumption against new oil and gas, and now Labour has joined them in being out of step with public opinion and environmental principles. Instead, it should recognise that our oil and gas sector is part of the solution, with the likes of BP and Shell committing tens of billions of pounds to net zero initiatives. Working with them, we can unlock even more investment, cut emissions further and provide the secure future of workers' needs. Folk might be asking themselves why South Scotland MSP is speaking in this oil and gas debate, but it is quite relevant to highlight and make absolutely clear that when we talk about a transition—actually, it is really, really serious—when we talk about a just transition, that it does not just affect the north-east. I have constituents and friends in the freezing Galway and the Scottish Borders who work in oil and gas, and I would ask that a just transition must include the south of Scotland as well. More than that, the just transition does mean expanding renewable energy in other parts of Scotland, including in Dumfries and Galway. D&G is already playing its part in renewables, with onshore wind, solar, hydroelectric power like tracks, Galway hydro scheme and small microhydro schemes, including at Penn Punt. Two weeks ago—I am sorry, I do not have any time because the time is really short, so I am not going to take any interventions. These three, four minute debates do not really give us enough time. Two weeks ago, I heard at a Parliament drop-in that 40 per cent of Dumfries and Galway homes are off-grid. So, again, transitioning and assisting in a just transition to renewable energy for heating houses is extremely important. We have heard already that our just transition does not entirely eradicate the need for fossil fuels and petrochemicals. 87 per cent of our oil and gas is currently used for transport, electricity and heating, while only 40 per cent is used for plastic production. Plastics are essential and will include other additional essential items, such as heart valves and joint replacement components, such as in total health and total knee replacements. We need to be careful how we manufacture our language when we talk about the just transition for other products as well. It was making me think about personal protective equipment during the pandemic—mass, aprons and gloves—they use our petrochemical industry manufacturing as well. I would ask that the minister, in closing, reaffirm that the Scottish Government recognises the diversity of oil and gas products and that that will continue to be the Scottish Government's approach. Scotland is an energy rich nation with significant renewable energy resources, a highly skilled workforce and innovative businesses across a globally renowned supply chain. Analysis shows that the number of low-carbon production jobs is estimated to rise from 19,000 in 2019 to 77,000 by 2050 as a result of just energy transition. That means that there will be more jobs and energy production in 2050 than there are now. By continuing to make the most of our vast renewable energy resources, we can deliver a net zero energy system that also delivers net gain and jobs within Scotland's energy production sector. There is a huge potential for Dfresda Galloway to benefit from renewable energy investment, including through the potential of fixed or floating offshore wind at site, known as SW1 in the Solway Firth. The community development trust in Imouth, in the east part of my region, has visibly benefited from offshore wind development. The community saw £50 million of investment before a turbine was even placed on the seabed and many highly skilled jobs were created. I am interested in whether we can see the benefits that have been witnessed in Imouth, how they could be replicated in Strunrar. Again, £50 million could potentially come to the community and people could choose which projects could be developed before any fixed or floating turbines are even in the water. However, part of the issue is engaging with the communities and to see how we can achieve that, there is an option for potentially whether a framework for community engagement could be considered. Through conversations with the South Scotland Enterprise, I am interested in whether a framework for community engagement is worth pursuing and so say are actually interested in that. Finally, Scotland is ensuring a just transition, but I will close there as, again, time is short in this debate. The topic of today's debate is, of course, on the most critical issue of our time. It is worth spelling out what the overwhelming scientific consensus says will be in store if we do not alter our ways of generating, using and exporting energy. The IPCC published its final in a series of six reports in March of this year, the culmination of nearly a decade of study by hundreds of researchers. It is brutally clear that every increment of further warming increases the risks of multiple concurrent hazards. The clearest path to keeping global temperatures within safe limits is to rapidly phase out fossil fuels. The researcher says that it is needed in the near term and that renewable energy must be urgently prioritised. What are the consequences of not heeding this advice? They say that there are increasingly irreversible losses across ecosystems on land and sea, increasingly insufferable heat in urban areas and in our oceans and a starkly different future for our children and grandchildren. The scientists say that our climate's future depends on our choices now and in the near term. Scotland is not hiding from the seriousness of that choice. The Scottish Government's draft energy strategy sets out a way forward, and I am pleased that the Scottish Government will no longer support unlimited recovery of fossil fuels. The development of the cambo field has been halted, and the UK Government must now use its reserve powers to do the same for all new licences, including Rosebank. I do not have time. There is no long-term future in North Sea oil and gas. Research undertaken for the Scottish Government makes it clear that, under all scenarios, the North Sea is a rapidly maturing basin with little prospect beyond the middle of this century. So our responsible Government and Parliament must grapple head-on with that challenge, securing a well-managed, supported and just transition for all working in the sector, particularly those communities in the north-east. That also means pushing ahead with site-specific just transition plans for Scotland's largest industrial polluters such as Mossmorran in Fife. The decline in fossil fuels is irrefutable. Our choice now is whether we accept a slow withering of skills and expertise or we grasp the opportunity to maximise the expansion of jobs in renewables and all the supporting sectors. Yet the Tories want us to ignore the writing on the wall for fossil fuels. The power over our future still lies in the hands of a UK Government that retained control of licensing and would prefer to sell out the north-east chance of a stable transition in order to maximise short-term shareholder profiteering. There is no guarantee that an incoming Labour Government would be any better. Keir Starmer's support for banning new licences for oil and gas in North Sea is, of course, very welcome, but Anna Sauer has said that they might still allow the £500 million barrel Rosebank field to go ahead. That is an impossible circle to square, Presiding Officer, but we lie at a critical juncture. Less than two years ago, we all united over COP26 in Glasgow and we committed to keeping 1.5 alive. From what I have heard in this debate already this afternoon, there is a consensus. It may at times be an uneasy consensus, but there is a consensus amongst four parties in this Parliament that we need to move beyond oil and gas and we can do that in a just way, which takes workers with us and puts workers at the fore. The only outliers in this Parliament are the extremist Tories who are denying the reality of climate change, but the time for urgent climate action is now, Presiding Officer. There is no credible long-term future in oil and gas, and it is our duty as politicians, credible politicians, credible politicians, to map out the alternative, and the Scottish Greens will be taking that duty seriously. Thank you, Mr Ruskell. I now call Jackie Dunbar, who will be the last speaker in the open debate. It may come as a surprise that I agree with some of the Conservative motion today. I agree that the Parliament recognises the vital role that oil and gas plays in Scotland's energy mix and in supporting tens of thousands of Scottish jobs, particularly in the north-east, and condemns Labour Party plans to ban new production from the north-east. I agree that someone who lives in, works in and represents a part of the oil capital of Europe. I know all too well the benefits that the industry has brought to my city, and I look forward to when it transitions over to be the energy capital of Europe. We are all aware that, even though the major use of oil and gas is often employed to generate energy, petroleum is used for many other essential everyday items. We will continue to need petroleum for our household products, our beauty products, our medicines, our clothing, our construction, furniture, electronics, agriculture, healthcare and even our children's toys. Dairy Michie, the former chief exec of oil and gas UK, which later became offshore energies UK, said at the first meeting of the CPG for oil and gas that I attended, that there was going to be a sweet moment. This moment will be when the use of renewables increase and oil and gas uses reduces, to a point where both become equal. Ms Michie said that this is when we will experience a true transition, and I could not agree more. That is what we should all be working towards. On the subject of just transition, I want to ensure that the staff who have worked in oil and gas, as many of my own family have, are supported in a just way and should their employment in oil and gas cease. Scotland is an energy rich nation, and the oil and gas industry has made a vast contribution to our economy, while its workers are some of the most highly skilled in the world. Scotland's oil and gas basin is now a mature resource. The Scottish Government is responsibly taking action to ensure the sector, and the communities that it supports are supported in a transition to a cleaner, greener energy system. Our oil and gas workers and their vital skills are essential to the transition. Workers and trade unions must be at the heart of everything that the Scottish Government does. With research from Robert Gordon University, highlighting that a majority of offshore workers could be delivering low-carbon energy by 2030 and that more than 90 per cent of the United Kingdom's oil and gas workforce have medium to high-skills transferability, they are well positioned to work in adjacent energy sectors. RGU's Making the Switch report highlights the potential for the North East region to become a net zero global energy hub that supports existing oil and gas roles into the renewables and low-carbon roles of the future. Just on Monday, with my colleague Audrey Nicholl, I visited the sea green offshore wind farm and I got chatting with the skipper of the wind cut, who, prior to working in the renewables industry, was a fisherman. He then went to work in oil and gas, went back to fishing and is now working in the renewables sector again. That is just transition and a prime example of how easy it can be for skills to transfer. In closing, the Scottish Government is absolutely committed to a just transition and ensuring that it takes workers with it on our journey to net zero. We need to ensure that we take the sector with us and recognise that we will still require petroleum. Even though that requirement will lessen, we need to ensure that it is locally sourced. We are in no doubt that it is the highly skilled workforce in the current oil and gas sector who will be best placed to transfer over to the renewables sector in a just and fair manner, and we will be at the forefront of delivering us our net zero targets. We now move to closing speeches, and I call in Daniel Johnson to wind up on behalf of Scottish Labour up to four minutes. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. There has been a pretty serious attempt to have a very divisive debate this afternoon, but I am nothing if not a consensual politician. Let me start by genuinely saying what I agree with both the opening speakers from both the Conservative and the Government benches. Liam Kerr is absolutely right. The oil industry is an absolutely vital industry to Scotland. It is vital in terms of the jobs that it provides, it is vital in terms of the income, and indeed the oil itself is vital. We have heard other contributors point out that it is not just as an energy source but as a critical raw material in terms of pharmaceuticals, medical devices, thighs and many other products that we need in our day-to-day lives. Indeed, that is exactly why we need to think very carefully how we use the limited oil that we have left. As I pointed out in my intervention, we have extracted 75 per cent of our extractable oil resources. It is simply just not possible to open the taps, continue the oil forever. It is finite, it is going to end. That is the reality. Even without a climate crisis, we would be having to contend with. I also agree with Neil Gray that, as we face this inevitable transition, we cannot abandon the workers, we cannot repeat the mistakes in the past and we have seen it time and time again, especially in energy sectors. When we stopped using coal, we saw the miners be plunged into penury. We have seen heavy industries such as steel and others when the transition and the utterly callous decisions from previous Tory Governments were made, leaving those skilled workers on the scrap heap, and we cannot afford to do that, because the reality is that this debate is not about the North Sea oil's past but it is about its future. As Liam McArthur said, change is unavoidable. The Tories came to the chamber today, claiming that this was a debate about economic realities. Let me give some. They talk about importing oil and being able to do that, but the reality is that 60 per cent of our gas was exported last year, 80 per cent of our oil. That fact does not stand up. Indeed, it is about price just in a moment. Greg Hans himself said that the volume of gas that we have simply would not impact global gas prices and that they were also arguing about resilience. Let me just gently remind the Conservative Party which party it was that sold off the gasometers, reduced our gas storage, down to days where the rest of continental Europe held weeks if not months. It was their Government's decision. I am afraid that their economic arguments are empty and devoid of any factual basis and without any context. I think that they should sound happy to take the intervention. Very briefly, we imported almost £3 billion of oil and gas from Russia in 2020. Why would the member increase our exposure to that regime? Ultimately, those £16 billion of oil are just not enough to deliver a continued supply to offset any of the impact on global prices that they claim to be purporting. The reality is that I am happy to go into a comparative fact check. The figures that I have in front of me are that 60 per cent of our gas and 80 per cent of our oil were exported. We are happy to go away and compare those figures, but that is not the only place. We have heard a misquote after a misquote. To use and coin a phrase from a political source, I think— Excuse me, Mr Johnson. Sorry, you did not hear me, but we do not want secondary chat across the benches. Mr Johnson, you will be bringing your remarks to a close very soon, I hope. To use a phrase that I think might have inspired some of the political arguments this afternoon, there have been many aspects of fake news. There is not going to be an oil shutdown or a turn-off. To quote Johnny Reynolds, who I was in the room when he said this, we are going to continue to be extracting oil well into the 2050s. This is about the North Sea oil's future, not its past. It is about 50,000 jobs, £28 billion of investment and the reality is that this has been a desperate motion from a desperate party who know that they are on their way out. Thank you, Mr Johnson. I now call on Gillian Martin to wind up on behalf of the Scottish Government. Up to five minutes, please, because we are five minutes. OK. A planned energy transmission will not only recognise the role of oil and gas plays in Scotland but will seek to harness the expertise, investment, capital and workforce within that sector. The role of the skilled oil and gas workforce makes the Scotland's present and future energy security is absolutely fundamental. Right now is our opportunity, as Jackie Dunbar said, that sweet moment potentially is in the horizon where we can bring stable employment and prosperity for generations to come. Obviously, the north-east of Scotland is at its heart and will remain our energy capital, but this time around there is even more potential for that prosperity to reach all over Scotland. Orkney is already leading the way, as I have heard from Liam McArthur and Jamie Halcro Johnston. Emma Harper has talked about some of the opportunities in the south of Scotland region. Mark Ruskell in his very consider speech said that oil and gas production will be happening until at least the mid-century. Along the road, there will be peaks and troughs on that. We have already a sense of the pressures that workers are facing in the survey of over 500 workers that I launched when I was on the back benches. The survey is part of our energy strategy engagement. Unions and interest groups are doing similar surveys as well. We saw in 2016 in particular what can happen to oil workers when the oil price dips. For many people that I know in oil and gas constituents, friends and neighbours, this was the second or third time that they had faced cliff edge redundancy. With North Sea oil and gas fuels maturing, it is getting harder and more costly to extract, and the workers know that their product is not as competitive as it once was. Those workers are looking to us to demonstrate the pathway to a more secure energy future, one that is not vulnerable to global politics or market shocks. Every householder is trying to keep their homes warm once the same. Transition is not a choice, it is a necessity. That has been demonstrated not just by the Scottish Government policy, but by business decisions that oil and gas companies are currently making, as Jackie Baill and Audrey Nicolle so deftly demonstrated. I respect a lot of the comments that the energy minister is making. Does she share my concern that the Scottish Government today has only created 3,100 green jobs, does not have a definition of those green jobs and does not know where they are? Those figures do not take into account the supply chain. Our supply chain is currently working on oil and gas across oil and gas and renewables, so it does not take into account that. We estimate that there will be 77,000 jobs in the low-carbon energy by 2050. That is why we need the planning. We can absorb the 57,000 skilled oil and gas jobs and create a few thousand more. In fact, the challenge is going to be to find enough people that are skilled up and trained to service all the potential that we have in Scotland. I know where he is coming from, but the fact of the matter is that that is why he has to plan. That is why we have to have a just transition plan in place. My goodness, I can also say that we need action from the UK Government, who holds key policy levers to deliver a net zero future. Reform of the electricity markets. Access to electric grid has been mentioned by Martin Whitfield. De-carbonisation of the gas grid, which I asked Liam Kerr about, was particularly interested in seeing how much hydrogen he thinks the UK Government might put into that. Track 2 has been given to the Scottish cluster and the ACORN project, which I know that my Scottish Conservative colleagues want to see as well. Liam McArthur mentioned the Committee on Climate Change. He should mention that the Committee on Climate Change has said time and time again that unless we have CCUS in Scotland, we will not meet our net zero targets. Our people need to see our energy choices working for us. We should never say again that Scotland's energy wealth has been squandered by the UK Government in the way that it did with our oil and gas revenues. Sarah Boyack was right to talk about community benefits and actively working with stakeholders on how we can make community benefits actually hit households in terms of their energy security. Scotland is already exporting 20 terawatt hours of renewable electricity to the rest of the UK, and we have even more renewable energy potential, and it will largely be powered by many of the people working in oil and gas. Our focus must be meeting the energy security needs, reducing emissions, and ensuring a just transition for our oil and gas workforce. Our approach is pragmatic, realistic, responsible and worker-focused. The Tonys are not planning for the future, we are, and we will take the oil and gas workers with us. I now call in Douglas Lumson to close on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives up to six minutes. I feel honoured to be here today of representing the people of the north-east and standing up for those jobs in the north-east. It is now clear from this debate that only the Scottish Conservatives are offering clear, unambiguous support to our oil and gas industry and the north-east of Scotland. This SNP-green devolved Government is against oil and gas exploration in the north-sea and would rather import our necessary energy needs from abroad, with supplies coming from places like Russia. Their presumption against oil and gas exploration in the north-sea means a cliff edge for our oil and gas industry. They seem to be intent on taking Scotland apart brick by brick rather than supporting business. This tone-deaf response from the Government to the needs of our economy is risking our economic recovery and will directly impact the pockets of everyone in Scotland during this cost of living crisis. Labour is no better with clear divisions between the party north and south of the border on this policy, with Anas Sarwar desperately trying to backpedal in media interviews this week, telling this that what Keir Starmer really meant was something different from what he actually said. However, the oil and gas sector and the people in the north-east will not be full. I will have a half-time later. The Labour position is a joke. They claim to want to support the oil and gas sector but won't allow new developments. Classic sitting on the fence as they try to appease their friends at Just Stop Oil and the trade unions who call their stance naive. Let me break the news to them. Without any new developments, we will run out of hydrocarbons well before we need to and then rely more on imports and throw thousands of jobs on the scrap heap, something that Sarah Boyack does not understand. However, the GMB recognises that. As does the head of offshore energies UK, who stated today, we are importing from countries where they do not necessarily have the same commitments to the climate goals that we have. We are exporting our jobs and we are leaving the country poorer as a result. That is the result of the actions that others in here are taking. As my colleagues have highlighted today, the Scottish Conservatives are the only party with a clear message of support for our oil and gas sector and a clear message of support for the tens of thousands of workers and communities that rely on energy production for their livelihoods and wellbeing. Make no mistake, while we still need to heat our homes, we still need oil and gas. While we still have an inadequate electric charging infrastructure, we will still need oil and gas. While we still run 50-year-old diesel intercity 125s between our cities, we will still need oil and gas. While we still need oil and gas, it is better for our economy, better for our environment and better for our jobs that we produce in this country. Liam Kerr makes this excellent point that it is the energy companies that are using oil and gas income to pay for our energy transition to billions of investment, companies such as BP, Shell and Equinor, or do you, Nicolle and Jackie Dunbarher, heard a visit to the sea green wind farm, both mentioned it, built in partnership with TotalEnergies, using income from oil and gas to build the energy of the future. That shows the importance of traditional oil and gas companies to our transition, something that the cabinet secretary seems to not understand. Jamie Halcro Johnston spoke well of the highly paid, highly skilled jobs that our economy so badly needs. The opportunities in the west of Shetland will mean so much to the local community. We cannot just throw that away. Audrey Nicolle speaks of the £500 million Just Transition Fund, but she fails to mention the £16 billion from the UK Government's North Sea transition deal. Gillian Martin talks about CCUS, which is over £40 million invested by the UK Government, while the Scottish Government zeroes its budget. We know that we need more investment in green energy production. One of the reasons why we are in favour of pursuing nuclear power is that we need to do this in partnership with industry, working with business instead of ignoring it, and working with communities throughout the north-east to ensure that they are leading on this issue. They are the ones that know best. If we are not listening to them, we are going down a path that will lead to job losses and economic decline in the north-east of Scotland. Let me be very clear. We support new oil and gas exploration in the North Sea, while there is still a demand for hydrocarbons. We believe in a just transition for the creation of green jobs. We support funding for any oil and gas worker that wants to reskill in renewables. We support the 90,000 workers who depend on the sector. Finally, we are the only party who will support the north-east of Scotland, its towns, communities and its people. That concludes the debate on a thriving future for Scotland's oil and gas sector and its workers. There will be a very short pause before we move on to the next item of business, which is to allow front-bench teams to change their position.