 Notiw'r Newid, rydym yn ei wneud dros y cifnwyr ar y perthwydion ryebidrach i Gwasana Cunigum wedi ei gweld y cifnwyr, yn fwyaf o'r lleidigol i gael gyda'i traf nhw, ac mae'n bryd i ddianafol形on o'r cynghori. Itul i Gwasana Cunigum wedi'i cyfrifiadau,lolwr, cymaintau'r lleidigol yn eich banfyn. Fy hoffipeisio'r Cifnwyr yn 2009, mae'r cyfrifiadau ar hynny yn amlw'r cifnwyr yn gweithreffneg arweith gael y meirifyr. The seven years on, I'm laying before this Parliament the Scottish Government's third report on proposals and policies for meeting the statutory emissions reductions targets from 2017 to 2032. This draft climate change plan has been prepared in accordance with sections 35 and 36 of the Climate Change Scotland Act 2009, but in the last seven years much has changed, not least the climate. The latest analysis by the European Commission's Copernicus Earth observation system confirms that 2016 was the warmest year on record. Global temperatures reached a peak in February 2016, around 1.5 degrees centigrade higher than at the start of the industrial revolution. Those temperature increases and their impacts vary enormously across the globe. Many of the people who have done the least to contribute to the problem have limited capacity to adapt. Our work through the climate justice fund supporting some of Africa's poorest climate vulnerable communities has emphasised the urgent practical need for global solutions. We saw a major step in the right direction in Paris in December 2015. The UN-Paris agreement, the first global legally binding agreement to limit greenhouse gas emissions, came into force on 4 November last year, significantly earlier than anticipated by the international community. We are now seeing extraordinary momentum towards a low-carbon future, a future that is being shaped right here in Scotland. Scotland has long-standing links to the climate change agenda. It was Professor Joseph Black at Edinburgh University in the 1700s who actually discovered carbon dioxide. He called it fixed air. On the other hand, James Watt's work on the steam engine in the late 1700s was instrumental in initiating the industrial revolution. That revolution brought radical changes to our economy and society and triggered the mass burning of fossil fuels, cue the beginning of anthropomorphic climate change. It is fitting that Scotland, having contributed to the problem in the first place, is now leading on many of the solutions. I had the privilege of attending the COP 22 meeting in Marrakesh last year, where Patricia Espinosa, the Executive Secretary of the United Nations, referred to the quote's great achievement of Scotland exceeding its 2020 emissions reduction target six years early. By delivering a massive 45.8 per cent cut in emissions since 1990, Scotland has demonstrated to the world that deep cuts are indeed possible. We should all be proud of that achievement. Without unanimous parliamentary agreement on the need for urgent action back in 2009, we could never have come so far so quickly. I can advise the chamber that Patricia Espinosa was surprised and incredibly impressed by the fact that that political buy-in was across the entire political spectrum. It is unusual in this world to have such unanimity. Our achievements are a direct result of our ambition, our determination, our hard work and our willingness to collaborate. Progress has been achieved not by the Scottish Government alone but by businesses, investors, communities and households, non-governmental organisations and the wider public sector, all working to deliver a common goal for the common good. Decarbonising electricity is critical in tackling emissions and we are well on our way. In 2015, renewable electricity accounted for an incredible 59.4 per cent of Scotland's gross electricity consumption. Scottish-based companies are selling their renewables expertise abroad in more than 40 countries. We have exceeded our 2020 target of achieving 500 megawatts in community and local ownership and, in line with our 2016 election manifesto commitment, we now pledge to double this to 1 gigawatt in the same time frame, the equivalent of powering half a million homes. We must not forget that many community and locally-owned renewables projects generate funds that can be spent at local people's discretion. On energy efficiency, we have exceeded yet another target, achieving a 15.2 per cent cut in total energy consumption six years earlier than planned. That is not just an impressive statistic. Our investment is making a real difference to vulnerable households in Scotland, particularly in addressing fuel poverty. In my own portfolio, we have seen a 77 per cent emissions reduction in the waste sector between 1990 and 2014. Almost 2 million households in Scotland now have access to a food waste collection service up from 300,000 in 2010. Those are just some examples of our progress. We have done well, but together we must do more. Today's draft plan sets out how we intend to reduce emissions by 66 per cent by 2032 against that 1990 baseline. That reduction takes us into truly transformational territory. For the first time, we have made use of an international standard for modelling emissions, reductions and energy issues. Some of you may have attended a session in the Parliament that my senior officials provided last year, which I hope you found helpful. That model has helped us to decide how to reduce emissions across the economy using a pathway broken down into carbon envelopes or budgets for each major sector. By 2030, Scotland's electricity system will be wholly decarbonised and supply a growing share of Scotland's total energy needs. System security will be ensured through diverse generation technologies, increased storage, smart grid technologies and improved interconnection. By 2030, the combination of carbon capture and storage and the production of gas from plant material on biomass waste will have the potential to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. By 2032, through Scotland's landmark energy efficiency programme, SEAP, we will have transformed the energy efficiency and heating of our homes and non-domestic buildings, termed services in the draft plan. That is what services mean when you read it. Wherever technically feasible and practical, non-domestic buildings will be near zero carbon and the majority of homes will be connected to low-carbon heating systems. Scottish households should save hundreds of millions of pounds on their fuel bills over the lifetime of the plan and thousands of jobs will be supported through the development of energy efficiency, as well as renewable heat services and technologies. Our shops, offices, schools and hospitals will be warmer and easier to heat by reducing energy demand. We can help businesses to improve their energy productivity and competitiveness and to release savings in the public sector for front-line services. The transport sector will be significantly decarbonised by 2032, with emissions dropping by a third compared to 2014. Low-emission cars and vans will be widespread and low-emission HGVs will be more common. We are committed to freeing Scotland's communities from harmful vehicle emissions. We will continue to invest in public transport and active travel and in low-carbon technologies such as electric cars and vans, hybrid ferries, green buses and the infrastructure that they require. In the charge place Scotland network, we already have one of the most comprehensive electric charging networks in Europe. Electric vehicle sales are climbing. We have also committed to the introduction of our first low-emission zone in 2018. We will evaluate and pilot the more extensive use of low-emission zones and associated changes to freight logistics and public transport, all of which will contribute significantly to improved air quality. Public health will benefit. Scientists tell us the more they learn about the impact of air pollution on our health, the more concerned they become. That is also a question of social justice. In Scotland's towns and cities, communities with the lowest rates of car ownership are often those most likely to be affected by pollution. In agriculture, our ambition is for Scotland to be among the lowest carbon and most efficient food producers in the world. By 2030, we expect farmers on improved land to know the nutrient value of their soils and to be implementing good practice in nutrient management and application. My message to Scotland's farmers is clear. What is good for the planet is good for your pocket and we will support you to ensure that you can cut your emissions and costs. Enhancing our natural carbon sinks is critical. By 2030, we will have restored 250,000 hectares of degraded peatlands against 1990 levels and the improvement of valuable soils, which represent around 20 per cent of Scotland's land mass. That is a step change in our ambition and is also fundamental for biodiversity, water quality and our own enjoyment of Scotland's spectacular natural environment. We will increase our tree planting rates over time up to 15,000 hectares by 2024-25, with a view to having 21 per cent of the Scottish land area in wood cover, an increase of around 3 per cent. In conclusion, the draft climate change plan and the forthcoming draft energy strategy set out challenging but achievable goals, which will boost Scotland's productivity and foster a vibrant climate for innovation, investment and high value jobs. We are committed to working even more closely with business to finalise and implement those plans and secure sustainable economic growth driven by innovation, exports and inclusion. Our long-standing commitment to a low-carbon future has provided certainty to investors, businesses and communities. It has given us credibility and respect on the world stage. It is a practical demonstration of our role as global citizens. Parliament now has the opportunity to help us to refine and improve our approach, so I commend the draft plan to members. The cabinet secretary will now take questions and issues raised in her statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for questions. I have a lot of members, so please, short questions and everybody will get in. I will be helpful if members who wish to ask a question press their question to speak buttons now. I call Maurice Golden, Mr Golden, please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I thank the cabinet secretary for the advance copy of her statement. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our age. I welcome the global commitment agreed in Paris, which recognises the importance of averting, minimising and addressing loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change. Here in Scotland, the 2020 interim target to reduce emissions by 42 per cent has been exceeded and I also welcome that. Moreover, the announcement today of the intention to reduce emissions by 66 per cent by 2032 against the 1990 baseline is truly a transformational step forward. The Scottish Conservatives are committed to sustainable transport, making sure that every home in Scotland has an EPC band C rating by 2030 and decarbonisation of our energy sector. The SNP Government has been very good at setting targets but not always meeting them, taking peatland restoration, tree planting and recycling rates as examples. I note that in the short time that I have had to review the draft plan, there are a number of policies that are not linked to budget lines. Given the ambitious target set today, what is the expected overall cost to the Scottish Government of delivering the climate change plan? I welcome the commitment of the Conservatives to the overall strategy that is pursued by the Government. I would anticipate that whoever was standing here in government would want to continue with this commitment. I hear what the member says about some of the individual ambitions and it is correct in what he is saying with both peat and forestry, for example, the progress against RPP2 was not as great as we might have wished, but we believe that we can make a step change in that. The uptake of woodland grants has started to increase the amount of money that we are putting into peatland restoration. We think that we will provide that necessary increased uptake. It is our intention to drive that forward to ensure that we are able to deliver on the much greater ambition that he is looking for. Again, I thank the commitment to come on board in terms of that ambition. In terms of the overall cost, what we have done is looked at the overall cost in terms of GDP for the whole of Scotland. It comes in at about 2 per cent of GDP because it is not just about costs borne by Government, it is about how we look at that across the whole of the economy. That 2 per cent figure in terms of GDP does not take into account, for example, the enormous benefits that are also involved. We are not paying—that is not a net 2 per cent where to be paid back to that is the huge benefit that there is in that. I tend not to want to simply talk about the costs. If you talk only about the costs, you miss talking about the benefits. There are enormous benefits and potential benefits in respect of that, including in the economy and innovation. I know that the particular member in question is keen on that. I thank the cabinet secretary for prior sight of the statement. I welcome today's draft climate change plan and the document will be used by us all to guide us to a more sustainable future. Global temperatures have risen to 1.1 per cent—1.1 degrees—over pre-industrial levels, alarmingly close to the 1.5 limit that the world has committed to strive for. Does the cabinet secretary agree with me that it is essential that there is robust funding for research and development for innovation across the sectors so that the necessary technology, which has not even been invented, can be effective? The statement is light on detail. It remains to be assessed as to whether the plan will provide enough guidance and finance to tackle the heaviest emitting sectors. As transport emissions have reduced less than 3 per cent since the 1990 baseline, there will have to be a massive step change—a big challenge for everybody in Scotland to meet the plan's target. A lot of those will fall under the local authority responsibility at a time of cuts. The SNP's failure to ban fracking in the plan—or even mention it—is a major let-down. If the Government is serious about tackling climate change, it would back my bill to ban fracking in Scotland. I thank Claudia Beamish for the overall support here because it is part of that cross-party commitment. I am just struggling very slightly to isolate a question out of that. If I start perhaps with the fracking first, that might be helpful. Fracking is not mentioned because we are not doing it. In those circumstances, factoring something in that you are not actually doing at the moment is not something that we considered was of much use. We are taking a cautious and evidence-led approach. I am conscious that the energy minister is sitting right next to me. I know that he is about to launch a full public consultation on that. In fact, in the pre-statement conversation Chitchat, he was asking me about some issues in respect of that consultation. Once responses have been independently analysed, there will be a consideration of the full range of evidence and recommendations will be made. However, in respect of this particular climate change plan, we are not doing it. In the timescale that we are talking about in the immediate future, it is not going to be factored in. If anything changed in the future, we would have to look again at the plan. However, at the moment, no. I am going to back benchers now, but I have got 11 members. I would like to get you all in, so please not just yourself, Mr Diggs. I know that you will do it. Short questions, and if the minister or cabinet secretary can do it, I know that it is difficult for every short answers. The ambitious target set for people in restoration following, as it does the budget commitment for 2017-18, is extremely welcome. The restoration grants reference in the plan will be open to all land managers. Larger-scale projects might, at least in the early years, be favoured in order to achieve economies of scale and the establishment of the kind of momentum that will require, and whether the Scottish Government recognises that we will need an accompanying increase in capacity and skills to deliver on that target. Cabinet secretary. Applications will be invited from land managers across the board if they are interested in delivering restoration projects. That will build on the excellent relationship the peatland action initiative has established with the sector. Obviously, we want to support the best projects, the ones that will deliver the most, and that is what we will be looking for. We agree that we need to further develop capacity to support the delivery of restoration, so we are going to be working to build on the successful work that is done today, as I said, which will involve training and development and dissemination of restoration tools and techniques. I should say at that point, of course, that that will also mean jobs, and that is an important consideration that needs to be reaffirmed. Cabinet secretary will already know that her budget for improving energy efficiency in housing is still £1 million behind where we were two years ago. When organisations such as WWF say that an average of £400 million a year is required, how will the current budget figure of £140 million achieve that? Can it be that the cabinet secretary will be relying on the UK Government's energy consumers obligation fund of £640 million, of which Scotland receives £11.5 million? That is not a short question. I thank you, cabinet secretary. I would have to advise the member that the energy efficiency is not coming out of my budget. It is coming out of the colleagues' budget, and the proposals that are being put forward by this Government leave completely trailing what is happening south of the border. As I understand it, absolutely no public money is going into energy efficiency south of the border. Frankly, for the Conservatives to ask a question about that, I just found it quite extraordinary. What we are doing will be extremely important. It is a key part of what will be delivered in terms of the climate change plan, but it is also key in delivering on fuel poverty targets as well. Given the ambition of the climate change plan, does the cabinet secretary see opportunities for Scottish businesses to innovate, such as the Glynwig Inn in my constituency, which has been using 100 per cent renewable energy and reuses heat and food waste and keeps 85 per cent of waste out of landfill? I have already talked about the jobs that might be available emanating from the amount of work that is being done in peatland restoration. We are already seeing the benefits of it. There are around 43,500 people directly or indirectly employed in the whole of the low-carbon and renewable energy sector in Scotland. Scottish-based companies are competing globally, as I indicated in the principal statement. There are many innovation examples. Kate Forbes has mentioned that. There are others. For example, the surf and turf project in Orkney, which is going to produce hydrogen from both onshore wind and marine energy, and the Glasgow housing association project working in partnership with the private sector, which will implement a new district heating scheme in south Glasgow. That will include the UK's largest air-source heat pump. There is already innovation in and around that. It is an aspect of that that we must not forget. It is not just about cost, it is also about benefit. The benefits go beyond just the climate change and environment. Richard Leonard, to be followed by Mark Ruskell, please. The cabinet secretary said that we are into truly transformational territory. What steps is she taking to ensure that no one is left behind, that we have a just transition for workers in industries that are detrimentally affected by this plan, and what about all those pensioners living in fuel poverty this winter? What assurances can she give them that they will not continue to be left behind? I have already indicated both in the statement and in some of my answers that that is a key part of the plan. I appreciate that people have not had the time to read it in its detail, but we talk about benefits beyond simply climate change. They will be benefits for everybody. I rather suspect that the people who are currently in fuel poverty, for example, are also the people who are most likely to be impacted adversely by poor air quality. I hope that the cabinet secretary would understand the health implications of that, both for people who are in their working environment and who are suffering from fuel poverty. At the end of the day, if we do not fix that problem, the negative impact will be on huge numbers of people. We need to get that sorted out. I hope that what I have heard from Richard Leonard does not suggest that Labour is moving away from a commitment to the overall policy. Mark Ruskell, to be followed by Liam McArthur. Thank you. Many of the 21 recommendations made by the Government's own adviser, the UK Committee on Climate Change, have been either rejected or only partially addressed in this plan. Given one of the central concerns of that committee was that agricultural emissions are set to overtake energy, will the Scottish Government commit to compulsory soil testing? It is clear that the voluntary approach, which resulted in only nine farmers getting involved in the Government's climate and farming programme, is failing. Cabinet Secretary? We have already committed to compulsory soil testing. I am on record as having done so, as has at least one of my predecessors. That is our intention moving forward. Liam McArthur, to be followed by Emma Harper, please. I thank the cabinet secretary for early sight of her statement. I welcome the aspirations in the plan and commit myself to helping with the scrutiny of that over the next few months. Will she advise on when Parliament can expect a detailed strategy on how we up our game in terms of district heating? Can I make a plea that energy efficiency programmes taken forward have a degree of flexibility to allow local circumstances to be taken on board? That is fine, Mr McArthur. Sorry, I have other people. That is two good questions. Yes, two good questions are not entirely within my portfolio remit. I am very conscious that the energy strategy is being published next week. I rather suspect that those questions might be more properly directed towards my colleague on my left. Emma Harper, to be followed by John Scott. To ask the cabinet secretary to expand on what the agricultural sector in Scotland can do to help us to meet our climate change targets. The approach to reducing emissions and agriculture is through maximising farming efficiencies, focusing on protecting and enhancing soils, tackling livestock disease and utilising the best technologies and turning waste into a resource. Low-carbon farming is not only good for the planet but also good for food producers' pockets. I want to refer back to my response to Mark Ruskell. I was at a farm yesterday morning, speaking to a very young, innovative farmer, Ross Logan, near Allawa, who did soil testing on his farm and, in the first year consequent on that, saved over £3,500 on fertilizer. You can be kind to the planet when you are farming and save a lot of money as well. I have never met a farmer yet who did not want to save money. Your cue, Mr Scott. John Scott, who follows Angus MacDonald, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I suppose that declaring an interest is a farmer, but, nonetheless, since 1990, emissions from the transport sector have only decreased by 1 per cent. In light of cuts to mitigation measures proposed in the current budget, can the cabinet secretary tell us how a 33 per cent reduction will be achievable by 2032, as referred to in her statement? Cabinet Secretary. Before I move on to transport, I very much hope that John Scott is conducting soil testing on his farm to make all the savings that are possible for it. If I move on to transport, of course, over the period since 1990, there has been a huge increase in demand for transport. I guess that we show our age and we think back to 1990 that most households would only have had one car. It is not uncommon now for households to have two or three cars. That has an enormous impact. That has been one of the problems in effecting change. However, I talked in my statement about some of the technologies that are beginning to come on board that will actually be able to help us to get to the challenging targets that we want to make. I remind everybody here that there is potential for innovation that we do not yet understand or know about. While we have not factored that in the plan, the reality is that I think that the world is changing very quickly. I would hope, frankly, myself to do even better that. I am aware that there are exciting proposals for district heating in Grangemouth and the east side of Falkirk, which will include a number of domestic and non-domestic buildings, such as the new Forth Valley College campus, due for completion in 2019. Will the Scottish Government continue to impress upon Scotland's local authorities and other public bodies the benefits of district heating, not just towards climate change, but also the economic, health and social benefits that district heating can bring to local communities? District heating, appropriately situated, is an efficient method of delivering affordable low-carbon heat to consumers and can help to reduce fuel poverty, which again comes back to the question that Richard Leonard asked earlier. That includes the associated health problems that fuel poverty can lead to. It plays an important role in the transition to an affordable low-carbon heat system for Scotland. The project that Angus MacDonald talks about is laudable. There are others, of course, and the Government does support that. I point out that one of the things that is supported is the low-carbon infrastructure transition programme that is supported by the European regional development fund, with a budget of £76 million. It focuses on accelerating the development of low-carbon infrastructure projects, including district heating. One wonders about the question now hanging in the air around that. Daniel Johnson, to be followed by Jenny Gilruth's last question. It is fair to say that progress in terms of energy efficiency for domestic heating has been disappointing. To follow on the theme, what specific measures are in the plan to promote district heating and combined heat and power units, both in terms of financial measures and, indeed, through the planning system? As the member knows, I am not responsible for the planning system. There is a huge planning review that has just been launched, and I hope that if he has particular concerns about how it works in respect of that, he will make his own submission to that. We are trying to drive forward on as many fronts as possible. That is one of them, and I think that we will be successful. Jenny Gilruth, please. Does the cabinet secretary agree with me that climate change policies have the potential not only to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and build a low-carbon economy, but also to deliver in other vital areas, for example health and social justice and, in a matter close to my own heart, encourage behaviour shift in the next generation through education? Cabinet secretary. I do. Absolutely. We have chosen the pathway that we have chosen to ensure that we meet our climate change targets while maximising economic growth and optimising wider benefits. We used the model that I talked about in my statement. The plan highlights a number of key non-carbon benefits—the combined value of air quality improvements as a result of reduced emissions, maybe in excess of £500 million per year. Increased numbers of journeys made by active travel will reduce congestion and pollution, in addition to the associated benefits of being active. I had a lovely visit this morning to Cury High School, which is showing a commendable commitment across the whole school to sustainability—everything from what food it produces in the canteen to what the young people are learning in the classroom. It just goes to show that that can impact on virtually every area of life. That concludes the question. I thank all members who have their question in, which shows what they can do when we all put our minds to it. We are moving on to the next item of business. I will leave you a few seconds for the front benches to change, please.