 Maes i chi i gefnogi dyn nhw y golygu hynny. Mae un bwysnys golygu hynny yn cwmpwyliaid ardal. Mae un cwmpwyliaid yn gweithio gwahan anghylch ychydigol i gyrtu'r cyfrifnwyr, ac mae'n dysgu i ddïchio ei fod yn ddegiwch. Alwydd, mae gwyfodol i ddechrau ar juicy o gyd yn gweithreduol. Mae gwaith'r cyfrifnwyr yn gweithredu ddegiwch yn cyfrifnwyr. i gyd ar gyntaf sydd yn頁fio i ffocilleg y bydd Nesgrool ddatblygu, beth mae'r cysylltu hanfodd ar gyfer y Llywodraeth UK ymweld mae'r perthyn llwyafol ym Gw lecthef y mwy o'r mawr panhau ysgrifennid Gweithredu. Llewisio ar gyngorau ac leolais yn llyfrrydolionol a'r myfynidol ei wneud. Mae'r wneud a'r cysylltu gyda Ni Gyllide � Llywodraeth a'r adeptio yn ei gwyloedd y llyfrnerd, a'r gyfnodd yn yn ei wneud umbeithlu i fynd. not least because of our renewables abundance and our expertise in energy. The cabinet secretary for net zero regularly engages with her counterparts in the other three nations of the UK through the net zero energy and climate change interministerial group. There are a number of reserved matters where the UK government action is critical to unlocking the full potential of Scotland's green economy. These shouldn't sit with the UK but as long as they do we will continue pushing them to act in the interest of Scotland's economy, people and the world's climate. I thank the minister for that response. According to offshore energies UK, backing home grown energy will strengthen supply chains, boost capability and unlock economic growth. However, UK wide many businesses are holding off confirming final investment decisions due to policy uncertainty from the current UK government. This and the latest U-turn from the Labour Party in abandoning their 28 billion investment in green energy, including one billion grains in my constituency, places Scotland's ambitions at risk. Will the minister, on behalf of the Scottish Government, emphasise to the UK Government whoever they are the importance of certainty in policy to unlock this vital funding? I'm very grateful to the member for this question. Policy certainty is critical to investment, so is moving quickly and gaining first mover advantage where possible. The current UK government has allowed us to be left behind as the US, Europe and others move quickly to stimulate domestic economic activity on net zero matters. I'm afraid that with Keir Starmer's Labour abandoning their flagship 28 billion pound green investment pledge this is a really important and significant thing on the very same day that scientists confirm that the world has terrifyingly breached the 1.5 degree warming threshold for a year that this is a terrible indictment of a future Labour government and indeed of the economic stability of broken Brexit Britain. Scotland is accustomed to the perpetual disappointment of Labour, so maybe it's not a surprise, but it is environmental and economic ineptitude. In addition to completely eliminating the green economy as a line item in this year's budget, the Scottish Government has slashed a budget for the Scottish National Investment Bank, the Scottish Forestry, land managers, skills development and the Scottish Funding Council. I'm going to ask the minister how on earth can the Scottish Government plans to deliver their targets without properly funding the green economy or being able to train the future workforce of the green economy? The Scottish budget does indeed prioritise nature, does indeed prioritise this green industrial transition. We have committed to invest up to £500 million of public sector funding over the next five years to into our offshore wind potential. We do need the UK Government to provide clarity on their longer-term approach so that we can continue to support the sector, but Scotland is doing what we need to do to invest in the supply chain and to make sure that we get the economic benefit from that transition to net zero. To ask the Scottish Government what it can do to address potholes on the road network, including what support is available for local authorities to do so, in light of reports that Edinburgh is the second worst city in the UK for potholes. I appreciate the road maintenance challenges in Edinburgh and across Scotland and the importance of a safe, well-performing road network. However, local road maintenance is the responsibility of local authorities who allocate resources on the basis of local priorities. In 2024-25, City of Edinburgh Council will receive £988.6 million to fund local services, which equates to an extra £48.5 million to support vital day-to-day services. Ultimately, it is for local elected representatives to make local decisions and how best to deliver services to their local communities. I have to say to the minister how bad does it have to get before ministers recognise the impact of sustained cuts to council budgets. Constructively, what work is the Scottish Government doing to monitor the health and safety impacts of our deteriorating roads and the impact of potholes on damaging bikes, buses and cars? A bike crash as a result of a pothole can be a massive impact on someone's health, never mind their wellbeing, and then they have the cost of buying new tyres on a regular basis. However, we have now got an issue in terms of the economic impact. What will the Scottish Government do to monitor the impact on the issue? I understand the seriousness of the issue. I am clear that we have responsibilities of the Scottish Government for trunk roads, but road safety, more widely, is a collective responsibility. In terms of the measurement and the impact at local level, we would be expecting local transport departments to be monitoring that. If she is suggesting that, she should be done in a more co-ordinated way. It may well be the case in terms of road safety that transport officials across local authorities work with Transport Scotland on that, so I will look into that matter and I would encourage everyone to think about the wider impact of road safety. It is one of the reasons why we have increased our maintenance budget nationally for trunk roads by 31 per cent. The priorities of the Labour Administration in Edinburgh are not aligned with the priorities of residents across the capital. Rather than focusing on essential road repairs and fixing the multitude of potholes on our streets, they are hell bent on pursuing pipe dream projects. Wasting £44 million on a business case for a grant to buy a quarter tram extension should not be a priority. That will also destroy a popular and well-used active travel corridor in Roseburn. Now the capital has the prestigious honour of being number one in the world for having the worst cycle lanes. I am pleading with you, minister. Will you use every piece of your influence that you have to ensure that the priorities of residents in Edinburgh are put first by this Labour-led council? Through the chair and its matters for which the minister is responsible minister. The member has made her point, but I reflect that increasingly people want Scottish Government ministers to interfere with local decision making by local councils. They want centralisation when we recognise that local authorities are elected by the people that they represent to make the decisions that they want to make. I would say that the member should also reflect that the budget challenges that everybody has means that we have to make challenging choices and, in terms of capital reduction, that particularly affects the transport budget. However, I think that it is up to the people of Edinburgh to decide what they want to do. If they want to elect parties that want to take forward ambitious projects to see a green transition in Edinburgh, they should do so. However, I think that it is for the people of Edinburgh to make sure that their views are well known. I think that it is for local councillors who are elected to do that to make those representations. I will need more brevity in the questions and, indeed, the responses. I will call question 3, Richard Leonard. Can I remind members of my voluntary register of interests to ask the Scottish Government what steps it has taken to encourage a modal shift to public transport? This Government is committed to modal shift as we continue to invest and support an affordable and accessible transport system, finding ways to promote public transport as an attractive option. For example, almost half of the population of Scotland is eligible for free bus travel through our concessory fare schemes. The extended ScotRail peak fares removal pilot encourages the use of public transport and we continue to invest in infrastructure, drawing on examples such as Falkirk stadium EV charging hub in the member's region, where active travel links to the town enable people to choose more sustainable modes of transport. Richard Leonard. Can I thank the minister for that answer? Getting people out of their cars and onto public transport is vital if the Scottish Government is to meet its climate change targets, and yet ScotRail, a company wholly owned by the Scottish Government, is trying to force through driver-only operations, removing safety-critical guards. After two years, the Scottish Government is still considering the axing of ticket office hours, and total safety-critical railway renewal spending for the next five years is £315 million lower than the previous funding period, with 70 front-line workers made redundant over the last few months. Will the Scottish Government rule out extending driver-only operations, rule out cutting ticket office hours, and will it reverse its planned cuts to safety-critical railway investment? I think that the member is mistaken. The member will know that I wrote to him on the 19th of January to point out to the mistakes and the analysis that seemed to imply that there was reduction in the rail budget. The rail budget has gone up in terms of the issues that he addresses, in terms of maintenance. There has been an 8 per cent increase in maintenance spend, and a 4 per cent increase in operations spent for CP7. The budget will have gone up from a £1 billion pre-pandemic to £1.6 billion in the railway system. I agree that the presence of staff on railways is really important. It gives people that sense of safety. In terms of our Government, we are committed to making sure that the operations of our railways are safe. We are doing it through maintenance, we are doing it by staffing. He will be aware of ScotRail expanding staff, recruiting staff and, in terms of our commitment, I think that it is really important to this chamber that, having written to the member on the 19th of January to correct the information. Removing barriers and encouraging greater bus usage will be crucial to securing any modal shift away from car journeys. Therefore, can I ask the minister to what extent the under-23 bus travel scheme helps to remove those barriers? For instance, how many journeys have been taken using that scheme since January last year? The under-22 scheme has been a great success. It has, I think, demonstrated the appetite for sustainable travel. Many young people travel a number of times a week, which I think is again creating that habitual use of public transport. Since January 1 this year, over 7 million journeys have been made by under-22s across Scotland. To ask the Scottish Government how it is embedding gender equality into its efforts to deliver a just transition. We are committed to doing what we can to help to increase diversity and representation in the workforce through supporting women and people with protected characteristics to take advantage of the opportunities presented by the green transition. Our just transition plans will show how that will be integrated into our policy making. For example, we have already funded flexible working in a workplace equity equality programmes to support women's participation in the workforce, and we will look to mainstream gender equality across our policy interventions in that area. Thank you, cabinet secretary. For that answer, a survey conducted by the Centre for International Labour Market Studies found that women make up just 4 per cent of the total oil and gas workforce in the UK. Here in Scotland, we have an opportunity to deliver a quality of opportunity for women and girls with their plans for a just transition. What is the Scottish Government doing to ensure that women and girls reap their fair share of the opportunities and benefits that a just transition will bring to Scotland? The member is quite correct in terms of her sentiments in relation to this issue. Our forthcoming just transition plans will also take into account the equality impact assessment that is being run at the moment by the consultancy's weco for the energy strategy and just transition plan, which includes reference to the status of women in the green workforce. That will underpin our just transition policy to ensure that we can achieve equity of access to those opportunities. Of course, we will stay in touch with the energy sector. There is a big role here for the energy sector to play itself to attract more women into those sectors. That is a very important dimension to this debate. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the net zero secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding the role of the renewable energy sector in meeting its net zero ambitions. The cabinet secretary regularly meets with ministerial colleagues to discuss how to maximise the role of the renewable energy sector in meeting our net zero ambitions, as well as delivering wider benefits to the Scottish economy. The energy transition offers significant economic opportunities for Scotland and is essential in reducing our emissions. We must also make sure that it delivers for the people, workers, community and economy of Scotland. It is critical that we work together to deliver a just transition to a net zero energy system. Recent reports that renewable technologies generated the equivalent of 113 per cent of Scotland's overall electricity consumption in 2022 were welcome. How will the planned Government's green industrial strategy bring about the investment our renewables industry needs to further build on this success and fully deliver our net zero ambitions? Those statistics show that the actions that we are taking to scale up the renewable energy capacity to transform and expand Scotland's clean energy generation sector are working. Developing a green industrial strategy is a signal that we are serious about capturing for Scotland the economic benefits of the global transition to net zero. It will sit alongside with and support our just transition plans, which will set out our plans to secure a fair transition to net zero for specific high-emitting sectors of the economy. Our green industrial strategy will offer a clear view of the economic sectors and industries in which we have the greatest strength and the most potential. What will the Government do to support those so that we can give the private sector confidence to make decisions and invest in Scotland? It can take more than a decade for offshore windfarms to complete the planning and consent process. The Government wants to cut that, but industry is sceptical that it will recruit enough specialists and planners. What can the minister tell them to reassure them that the Government has made progress in this? In other words, how many more planners have been recruited in the last while? The member is quite right that the planning system has a crucial role to play. We have engaged extensively with the UK Government to seek devolution of the necessary powers to Scotland to ensure a modernised-grade consenting regime that is fit for purpose. The member is correct that planning and consenting is key to unlocking our energy potential and that the Scottish Government is working very hard to do so. We know solar energy is a crucial contributor to achieving an affordable energy mix and just transition. While the Scottish Government's commitment to enhance solar energy generation by 2030 is incredibly welcome, there is a notable constraint while the current cap on energy generation is set at 50 kilowatts. Can the minister provide reassurance that the Government is working towards removing these output restrictions so that people can reap the benefits? While policy and regulation in respect of electricity networks is reserved to the UK Government, we have established a local electricity networks co-ordination group, which brings together representatives from different sectors to find ways forward on exactly those sorts of issues. In some places where a generation project greater than 550 kilowatts wishes to connect to the distribution network, the DNO is required to seek approval from the electricity system operator. That is because there may be a wider system impact on the transmission as well as the distribution network. We recognise that that can result in cost and time delays to connecting those projects. To ask the Scottish Government what impacts the 2024-25 budget will have on Strathclyde partnership for transport. Scottish Government officials are engaging with Strathclyde partnership for transport on the impact of the budget to ensure the sustainability of their services. It is regrettable that no capital funding has been allocated to SPT in 2024-25. However, the UK autumn statement was a worst-case scenario confirming that the Scottish Government's capital block grant is forecast to contract by almost 10 per cent in real terms over five years. Revenue funding for regional transport partnerships including SPT has been provided for 2024-25, with the specific allocation that is currently being prepared by Transport Scotland. Cutting the funding to Strathclyde partnership for transport will be a hammer blow and greatly damaged efforts to encourage individuals to use public transport. Equally damaging as well is that Strathclyde partnership for transport was not contacted about the dissemination of their budget prior to budget day. I would like to ask the cabinet secretary what justification does the Government have for cutting the budget and not informing SPT of that decision before budget day? In terms of the sourcing of funding for SPT in capital terms, it can come from different departments within Government. I can speak for Transport Scotland on the basis that their investment has been into the subway specifically on capital terms. The Scottish Government has provided £154.3 million to date and has remained committed to the funding of £246 million towards the programme. In terms of the other allocations, members cannot come to the chamber and complain about capital cuts without taking responsibility that the party and the Government responsible for the capital cuts on our budget are the Conservative UK Government. Cutting the general capital grant for Scotland's largest city's public transport authority from £15 million to zero is a catastrophic misadministration and the Government should accept responsibility for that. That will have huge knock-on effects for Glasgow's transition. It will have huge knock-on effects on the ability to build public transport in the city. I urge the minister to urgently meet the chief executive SPT and reverse that atrocious cut. As I said, the sources of funding of capital to SPT come from across different departments in budgets terms. Transport Scotland officials are engaging with SPT. It is not a misadministration. What it is is the consequences of a UK Westminster Government. Even if a Labour Government is to come in the general election to get elected, it is part time until the regular Conservative rule, which the Labour Party endorses from year to year, decade to decade, right across recent times, comes back with a vengeance. We need independence, so we do not have to rely on a UK Government that cuts our capital budget. Our Labour are quite happy to let that continue. Question 7, Alex Rowley. Apologised, Presiding Officer, for being late for this session. I have got my times mixed up. To ask the Scottish Government what criteria it plans to use to assess how successful the ScotRail peat fairs removal pilot has been. The ScotRail peat fairs removal pilot has been extended to 28 June 2024. An interim evaluation is under a waiting exam on the impacts on rail travel patterns and other modes, as well as a formal value for money assessment. A final evaluation will be undertaken at the end of the pilot, and the Scottish Government will carefully consider the impact and long-term sustainability of the pilot with reference to three main strands, multimodal evaluation of current travel patterns and impact during and potentially after the pilot, evaluation of the pilot and rail travel patterns before and during the pilot, and providing a value for money assessment of the pilot. I believe that the decision to remove what, in effect, was a tax on workers was absolutely correct. I think that it has been received really well, and certainly people I speak to that are workers at this time of real difficulty struggling have welcomed that. I welcome what the minister says. Will the minister ensure that she comes back to Parliament? I believe that all parties in here should work together for what is a good policy, and that we should get a decision to continue this policy indefinitely, certainly before we reach the 20th of June. I agree with the member that we have to look at the context of the peak fare removal within the wider issue of how we help to support public transport and more people to travel using public transport, but we need to have a robust assessment, as I have said. I am quite happy to share that with members across the chamber, but he is correct in identifying what it means for people during a cost-of-living crisis. For the Cowdenbeath to Edinburgh line, for those who are travelling three times a week from the start of the pilot to during the end, they will have saved £680, and if they travel five times a week, they will have saved £1,134, so it has been a saving for many workers in Cowdenbeath, in Fife, in Scotland. I think that that valuation has to measure the value for money, but can we get a modal shift and regular use consistently of our railway system? Can the minister detail to the chamber the benefits that the Scottish Government initiative is offering to commuters and the travelling public in Aberdeen and the northeast more broadly? What does the Government hope to achieve through the extension of the removal of the peak fares? The extension allows us to continue to monitor. You will realise that we have had an extensive period of storms. I think that extension will help us to give a better assessment on a regular basis, and it certainly helps to have more robust data to inform the final evaluation. In terms of savings, you are seeing the savings right across the northeast, and the levels of savings that I talked about in relation to Mr Rowley's question can apply. Indeed, with the trial from Haven to Aberdeen, even on a daytime, it was £10.50. Before the trial, it is now £7.50, so that benefit is immediate, but we have to assess it for the longer term. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on transport infrastructure projects in the south of Scotland. This Government is taking significant action to progress transport projects in the south of Scotland. We have invested in operation and maintenance of the rail and road networks. An example is our on-going work with communities in Ballantrain and Curcosel on the A77 to address concerns with speeding, noise and lack of pedestrian crossing. In addition, we are improving active travel and electric vehicle infrastructure in the current financial year. Additionally, my officials are working with their counterparts in the UK Department for Transport to finalise the details of £8 million in funding for the A75, finally confirmed by UK ministers on 7 December. All efforts have been made to secure that funding and allow work to commence in the next financial year. I met McKayla Yates and Samantha Jane Shields last week. Their 51-year-old husband and dad died on the A75 after a collision with an HGV in November. They joined me in calling for average speed cameras for the length of the A75. In addition, on Tuesday night evening, there was yet another serious accident at the notorious hawk of our road end. Can I ask the cabinet secretary why she is not considering average speed cameras for the A75 when it is good enough for the A9 and other main routes in Scotland, which would bring about immediate improvements in road safety? Can I urge the minister to accelerate the process to improve the junctions along the A75 with the high accident rates that we see? We have had enough consultations. We do not need to get on with the improvements. On our roads, any tragedy is a tragedy too much. I express my condolences to the family concern as well. There has been £85 million spent on maintenance improvements on the A75. There is always more that can be done. The member is correct to represent his constituents to come here with specific examples. In relation to the average speed camera issue, that is something that I will take away from my officials to examine in terms of that on-going maintenance and improvement for safety on that road. Thank you minister, and with apologies for those that I was not able to call, that concludes portfolio questions. There will be a brief pause before we move to the next item of business to live from Benches to Change.