 The next item of business is an urgent question, and I call Michelle Thomson. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to support those affected by the decision of Petro Ineos to close its refinery. I thank Michelle Thomson for giving me this opportunity to update Parliament. First, I would like to recognise that this is a very worrying time for the workers at Grangemouth and assure them of my personal and this Government's commitment to work to ensure they receive the appropriate support. Having spoken to refinery senior managers with the First Minister this morning, it is my understanding that this is not a decision at this point to close the refinery but to start the necessary preparations to have the potential to transition Grangemouth to an import terminal. We will continue to engage practically with all stakeholders as this develops. The management was also clear that this is a commercial decision taken due to global factors and not a decision to take that has been taken because of anything that this Government or indeed the UK Government has done and indeed that they are supportive of our 2045 targets. I have also met this morning with both Unite the Union and the STUC to express our full support for staff at Grangemouth and ensure that we are doing all we can to ensure a sustainable future for the refinery. We have a shared commitment to insisting that a just transition for workers is at the heart of any future decision and I will continue to engage with unions and restate that my door is always open to constructive dialogue to support the future of workers and the site more generally. Finally, I have also written today to the Secretary of State for Energy and Security to outline my concerns regarding this announcement and ask for an urgent meeting to discuss how we can work together to support those affected by the decision and will be seeking assurances around fuel security. I would just advise that I will allow a wee bit of extra time for this but we have a number of members who are seeking a supplementary and therefore I would ask for the questions to be brief and the answers as well if possible. I quite agree, cabinet secretary, that our immediate thoughts must go to those affected by the decision, regardless of outcome, who are now fearful for their jobs as it moves from a refinery facility to potentially an import facility. The impact will indeed be felt by those directly in the refinery but also potentially by small businesses and the wider supply chain around Grangemouth. Grangemouth already struggles with high levels of social deprivation and the ultimate closure potentially will be felt acutely in the town. What assessment has the Scottish Government made of the wider impact of this change on the SME sector, supply chains and Scottish GDP and what discussions has the cabinet secretary had with trade unions and management of the refinery that he can give additional information? Finally, will the Scottish Government work with me as a constituency MSP to set up a task force to support those who could be affected? We absolutely recognise the uncertainty, the anxiety and the feeling of despair that this announcement will place in a range of people and workers associated with Grangemouth. I give my assurance to work collaboratively with all partners to ensure that any impact of this and subsequent decisions are mitigated as far as we possibly can. It is important to note that Grangemouth remains an important asset in Scotland's energy future and, as such, we have committed to publishing a Just Transition Plan for Grangemouth in the spring. Work on this is well underway and we have engaged with business, the local community, wider stakeholders and we will continue to do so over the coming weeks and months. This morning, as I set out, I met with the trade unions, assured them of my support, that this Government is committed to securing jobs at the Grangemouth site and I agree with them that we must succeed in securing a Just Transition Plan for workers and will work with the unions, MSP colleagues, workers and wider stakeholders to ensure a sustainable future for their primary and support those who may be affected by this announcement. In its discussions thus far with Petroinius and the UK Government, which of course has reserved responsibility for fuel security, what assurance has the Scottish Government been given regarding this and have they asked the UK Government to conduct a risk assessment to test any assurances? Furthermore, the potential for any sustainable future for the site and not just importing fuel can only be at a very early stage, so what further steps does the Scottish Government anticipate taking to move the site from the potential for a Just Transition to an actual Just Transition, be it in sustainable aviation fuel, hydrogen and will the cabinet secretary commit to keeping members updated on any progress? Through the refineries maintenance periods, Grangemouth imports fuel from other markets and as such the site already has the ability to operate as an import terminal. My understanding is that this announcement is the preparatory work to enable this at a greater scale. Following our meeting with Petroinius this morning, I wrote to the Petroinius trading chief executive to seek assurances from him that the business will ensure the Grangemouth role as a source of domestic road and air fuels will continue for years to come along with other asks. My officials remain in regular dialogue with the UK Government and I have written today to the Secretary of State to ask for an urgent meeting given the reserved areas of responsibilities of the UK Government. I have been clear in the letter that it remains my firm preference that the refinery should continue operating for as long as possible and we will continue to engage proactively with Petroinius as we develop our Just Transition plan for Grangemouth and I will obviously give the commitment to keep all members updated on this as it progresses. Obviously there is a considerable degree of interest in putting a question and I will seek to take as many members as I possibly can but I would need the co-operation please to have succinct questions and answers and with that I call Stephen Kerr to be followed by Jackie Baillie. Thank you. The Secretary of State for Energy Security in next year I believe has spoken by phone with the chief executive of Petroinius. I note that the cabinet secretary says he has written to the chief executive. Will he undertake to meet the chief executive? Would he also undertake to press for a meeting with the Secretary of State because it's very, very important as we have learned from experience in 2016 that both of Scotland's Governments work very closely together in relation to this matter? I think that's what the people of Grangemouth would expect at very least. Will he undertake to give assurances that he will have those meetings and that everything will be done co-operatively in order to do what is right for the people of Grangemouth? Yes, and I thank Stephen Kerr for those questions. I've given confirmation in my initial answers to Michelle Thompson on both, but just to have absolute clarity, yes. The offer of a meeting actually came from Petroinius and the initial correspondence to me. I have since responded saying I absolutely would like that meeting to take place in very short order. I have also written to the Secretary of State today asking for such a meeting in a collaborative space to look at what we can do together, to look at all potential options, to extend the potential life of the refinery, although understanding the challenges that exist for that to be achieved. It's a very challenging situation that has been outlined about our endeavour. Obviously, working with Petroinius, the UK Government trade unions and other partners to ensure that we can do everything possible to try to make sure that there is a longer period for this refinery, but also a more sustainable future for the wider Grangemouth site. Hundreds of families across central Scotland will be anxious today after the announcement of the proposed closure of the refinery. For years, Grangemouth has been synonymous with Scottish industry, and it is strategically important for Scotland and, indeed, the whole of the UK, and plays an important role in providing fuel security. When was he first told this devastating news? Can he detail the Scottish Government's prior work with Petroinius on net zero transition and when it started, and what plans are in place to secure jobs and the future of Grangemouth? Thank you very much. I thank Jackie Baillie for her questions, and, as she would expect, we have been aware for some time that the business has been considering its future transition options, and we have been working with them as part of that. Like all refineries across the UK and, indeed, across Europe, Grangemouth will have been considering a range of commercial factors as part of that, with the wider geopolitical and economic situations around the world. We were notified by the business on the morning of Tuesday 21 November of Petroinius' specific plans, as announced in the media yesterday, at the same time as the workforce were, to commence preparatory work for construction of the import terminal at Grangemouth and Finna. Obviously, Peter, this has been with a refinery over 100 years old. This has been something that has been a potential on the horizon for some time, which is why some of the work that we have been setting out, such as looking at a biofuel refinery, looking at the opportunity for the wider site to be part of the carbon capture cluster, looking at the opportunity around the development and usage of hydrogen, among other things, has been part of the work that we have been doing. I have got an opportunity, I hope, for colleagues across the chamber tomorrow afternoon to discuss some of that in greater detail, and I will obviously be happy to share details of that with colleagues who would request it in writing. I have met unions and have spoken to residents, and they are rightly concerned about what yesterday's sudden announcement means for Grangemouth. I am sure that those of many across the chamber will be with those affected. The lack of information is causing concern among the community, and I believe that an urgent summit is required to provide certainty about what comes next. Will the cabinet secretary consider convening this, and will he meet workers with me at the site? As I set out in my initial response to Michelle Thompson, I met with the United Union and the STUC and have given a commitment to continue engagement with the trade union representatives going forward, not least to discuss what options and ideas they feel that they may have going forward for the wider Grangemouth site and indeed the refinery itself. I have obviously got the opportunity for Gillian Mackay tomorrow afternoon to discuss some of those ideas. Of course, I am more than open to considering the opportunities that may arise from such a summit and whether or not meeting workers directly at the site with her and how that might help to assuage some concerns but also answer some questions that they may have. If I heard the minister correctly, he is saying that this might not be the end for the refinery in 2025 that life could be extended. Can he set out what factors might be considered in extending the life and what support is being offered by the Government to make that happen? It is not a hard and fast decision. A final decision still has to be taken. I do not want to set unrealistic expectations that this is an incredibly challenging situation. Given the age of the refinery, it is efficient, relative efficiency but also the global factors that are played, the energy costs that they face as well as the fuel costs that they are then putting out. The margins are becoming incredibly challenging. I am looking at everything that I can possibly do within the resources that we have, looking to work with UK colleagues, the ideas that I have set out in response to Jackie Baillie's question around such as carbon capture, hydrogen and a biofuel refinery to try to make sure that the wider Grangemouth site continues to be a heart of industrial activity. Those areas will continue to look at and continue to provide as much support as we can. Last year, Scotland's North Sea sent over £9 billion in revenues to the UK Treasury, yet it looks like we are heading towards Grangemouth no more. The refinery is obviously of strategic national importance and the Scottish Government intervened decisively twice before to help to save the plant in 2008 and in 2013. What are the prospects for doing so again? We are looking at everything that we possibly can do in order to ensure that there is continued industrial activity at the Grangemouth site. It is important to not be too alarmist in the narrative that we are putting forward. That is about the refinery, not about the wider Grangemouth site and the wider businesses and operations that are based there. Obviously, the Grangemouth refinery is incredibly important strategically and as an economic asset. We will continue to look at all that we can do, given the answers that we have already given elsewhere, alongside colleagues in the trade union movement, with Petrinos and the UK Government, around whether there is anything to extend the life of the refinery, but I cannot underline enough the challenges that are currently being faced. Presiding Officer, the news from Grangemouth is a hammer blow to the industry and the local economy. This devolved Government has set out to demonise oil and gas industry at every opportunity. It, along with Labour, is against new production in the North Sea and would prefer that we rely on imports. The SNP has accepted the Greens into government that we want to shut down the oil and gas industry. The First Minister said two months ago that he wanted to end Scotland's role as the oil and gas capital of Europe. Does the cabinet secretary now accept that the message that the Government is sending out is putting thousands of jobs at risk, including those at Grangemouth? I am very sorry that Dougithompson has chosen to take that particular tone, because that is not where others have been. In fact, Petrinos said themselves that this had nothing to do with decisions that have been taken either by the Scottish Government or, indeed, by the UK Government. This is about global factors. This is about the situation facing not just refineries here in the UK but around Europe, and, unfortunately, the narrative that Dougithompson has attempted to set out is entirely unhelpful and has nothing to help the workers that are currently affected. Can I remind members of my voluntary register of interests? Does the cabinet secretary stand by his statement that the closure of the Petro Ineos oil refinery at Grangemouth would be a commercial decision that will future proof the site? Or does he agree with me that it is a strategic national asset and that those are strategic national manufacturing jobs and that this is about a strategic national energy supply whose future should not be determined by billionaire absentee owners? I have engaged constructively with the trade unions that are directly involved in the union as well as the STUC. There is a shared understanding of the need to ensure that there is a just transition that happens not just at the refinery but also at the wider Grangemouth site. Obviously, I hope that Richard Leonard is able to attend the discussion that we can have tomorrow to set out in more detail some of this work, but I agree with him that this is that Grangemouth, not just the refinery but the wider site, is obviously of strategic importance. However, it is privately owned by a joint venture of Ineos and Petro China. They have commercial decisions to take. We are obviously looking to try to do what we can to support those decisions going forward. However, resources that we have and indeed that the UK Government have need to be considered as part of that, but we will work with the trade union movement with the joint venture partners and indeed the UK Government to look at all we can do to extend the life of the refinery. Thank you, cabinet secretary. That concludes the urgent question and I thank members for their co-operation in that I was able to take every member who had sought to ask a supplementary. There will be a short pause before we move on to the next item of business. Thank you.