 Good afternoon. The first item of business is topical questions in order to get as many members in as I possible. I would be grateful for shortings as taxed questions and responses. At question number one, I call Miles Briggs. First point, Presiding Officer. To ask the Scottish Government what analysis is carried out regarding the implementation and potential impact of short-term 여�os. Cabinet Secretary Schoner Robison. In December 2021, we published six different impact assessments. under a separate business regulatory impact assessment, where, informed by evidence and information from partners and stakeholders, are set out analysis on the likely costs, risks and benefits of short-reflect sector regulation, and will continue to work with local authorities. local authorities. In the summer of 2023, we will review levels of short-term let-activity in hotspot areas to assess how the actions we are taking are working and ensure that there are no unintended consequences. Miles Briggs. I know that the cabinet secretary is acutely aware of the concerns being expressed, especially by class 7 guest houses in Ben and Breakfast, which have been included in the scheme by some councils that should have been excluded, and indeed many councils not even having in place the teams to do this work. Like many small businesses, short-term lets are still to recover very much so from the Covid pandemic. The Scottish Association of Self-Caterers have warned that the Scottish Government's legislation will negatively impact on the sector and are now calling for the implementation of this legislation to be delayed. Can I ask the cabinet secretary, with this in mind, will she agree to delaying this legislation and take on board these growing concerns on the negative impact that it will have? On the first issue of delay calls, we have introduced, as a member knows, licensing to first and foremost ensure that there are mandatory safety standards for short-term lets across Scotland. It also provides local authorities with the powers to introduce additional licensing conditions to address issues that are concerned to their local area. As a member will also know, many short-term lets already comply with those conditions, and for those who do not, it is important that they are in place as soon as possible to ensure level playing field and safety across Scotland. There is a transition period for existing operators, and they have until 1 April 2023 to apply for a licence and may continue to operate while their licence is being determined. Miles Briggs mentioned the issue of guest houses specifically, which I am happy to deal with, because I think that it is important for clarity here. The Civic Government Scotland Act 1982 or 1982 Order 2022 does not reference planning use classes. Schedule 1 lists excluded accommodation, which includes hotels with planning permission granted for use as a hotel, but it does not list guest houses with planning permission granted for use as a guest house as an exclusion. Therefore, to be clear, unless otherwise excluded by any of the criteria set out and schedule one of the licensing order, short-term let accommodation will require a licence to operate, including guest houses. We have been clear about that for quite some time, and certainly since June 2021. I hope that there will be no misunderstanding there. On the issue of promotion, we will ensure that there is a campaign running from October, which will again make information in the public domain very clear indeed. I have written to local authority housing conveners and chief executives to remind them of their duty to establish short-term licensing schemes by 1 October this year. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer, but I think that it is a complacent one in the sense of the inconsistencies that we are seeing across local authorities in the implementation of this Government legislation. The Deputy First Minister, for example, has been telling guest houses in his constituency that they are exempt. The Scottish Government clearly is not giving the right information to constituents and businesses. What is clear from what the cabinet secretary said today is that this does not need a bit of time to properly work and to be bedded in. Does she not realise that this legislation is a mess and needs to have a pause for councils to properly implement it, especially given that many have not even employed the staff yet who will be tasked with doing this? First of all, I do not accept the description of the legislation. We have had numerous consultations on the legislation. Parliament has had ample time to scrutinise it. There has been widespread consultation with stakeholders and stakeholder input into the stakeholder implementation group. The member mentioned inconsistencies during this year. We have worked with the Scottish Housing Network and officials from across all local authorities to plan for implementation of the licensing scheme. That has involved discussing different local approaches to understand the rationale and facilitate common processes where possible to do so. There will be some circumstances where, as I gave my answer earlier, there will be local variation because of local need. However, we have tried where possible to ensure that there are common processes and that there are simple online information and application processes that should be straightforward for applicants to follow. During the local government housing and planning committee scrutiny of the short-term let's licensing scheme, most councils express support or enthusiasm for the plans, especially those with tourist hotspots. With those new measures, does the cabinet secretary believe that councils will feel more empowered to balance tourism with the needs of their local communities? Cabinet secretary? Yes, I agree with that. Local communities have told us over a number of years about their safety concerns and the impact that the short-term let's can have on communities and the availability of housing. Regulation of short-term let's is appropriate for the whole of Scotland and offers considerable flexibility to local authorities on how it is implemented. Licensing will allow councils and communities to take action to manage issues more effectively without unduly curtailing some of the benefits of short-term let's to host visitors and the Scottish economy. However, we need to ensure that they are safe and that people providing them are suitable and fit and proper people to do so. I am surprised that anyone could disagree with that. Sarah Boyack Cabinet secretary, while we have waited for the SNP Government to act on short-term let's, thousands of homes were lost in Edinburgh, but Labour-led Edinburgh council has now implemented the new rules as quickly as possible. Over £3 million was lost to the public person in Edinburgh in the last financial year alone because of the loophole that still exists where short-term let's owners can move to business rates and then receive the 100 per cent small business bonus scheme discount. Given that the Scottish Government committed years ago to reviewing the tax treatment of short-term let's, what progress has been made on that review and when will that review be completed? I think that Sarah Boyack, in the interests of fairness, would possibly recognise that a lot of the groundwork that was done under the previous administration in Edinburgh completed under the current administration. I think that anyone giving a fair analysis would recognise that. We were happy to give ministerial approval to the order that had been brought after proper due consultation, which, of course, was welcomed as part of the short-term let's control area that local authorities had to consult with their communities. Of course, that takes time, but it is the right thing to do. If we hadn't put that in, I am sure that people in the chamber would be raising concerns about the lack of consultation locally. I think that that is the right balance and it is important to get it right. On the issue of taxation, we have taken steps to ensure that self-catering properties are correctly classified on the valuation role for non-domestic rates tax purposes. From 1 April 2022, premises are now required to be actually let for a period of at least 70 days and available for let for 140 days in the same financial year in order to be classed as self-catering. That was some way to addressing some of the loopholes that Sarah Boyack was referring to, but I am happy to give her any further information that she would find helpful in that regard. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will make a statement on the policing and arrests at events connected to the death of the Queen and the proclamation of a new monarch. I pay tribute to Police Scotland for its considerable efforts in the planning and delivery of Operation Unicorn, an operation in scale complexity and sensitivity without precedent. It is though the fundamental right of anyone living in a democracy to peacefully protest. As demonstrated during COP26, Police Scotland protect people's right to protest whilst balancing the rights of the wider community and upholding public safety. The member will appreciate that operational decisions are a matter for the chief constable with scrutiny and oversight provided by the Scottish Police Authority, and it is not appropriate for me to comment on specific cases. And any complaint about the actions of officers should be made directly to Police Scotland in the first instance. Thank you. I recognise that it was a huge policing operation, but media reports suggest heavy-handed policing with four arrests for breach of the peace, a number of others detained and then released without charge, and a woman who was demonstrating about free speech followed by police officers. What discussions has the cabinet secretary had with Police Scotland about those incidents? I think I've just said, Presiding Officer, that I am not able to comment on individual cases, but I do confirm that Police Scotland do approach their job firmly on the basis of human rights legislation and operate, of course, under the principle of policing by consent. They have confirmed that there will be a formal debrief process for Operation Unicorn, and I understand that Operation Unicorn will be discussed at the Scottish Police Authority board later this month, the appropriate forum for doing that. I also understand that this will include reviewing at least one of the incidents that took place while the operation was active. I'm meeting with the chief constable tomorrow and we'll discuss these issues with him with a view to looking at, as ever, what lessons can we learn from the operation and how these can be applied to future policing operations. I will also congratulate him and his force on a superb job, notwithstanding the issues that have been raised by the member. Does the cabinet secretary agree that those incidents create a worrying precedent and that freedom of speech is a fundamental right? I'm grateful that he is going to discuss those issues with Police Scotland tomorrow, but would he ensure that MSPs get the opportunity to discuss those issues and our approach on policy on those issues? Cabinet secretary, I've just confirmed that the right to peaceful and democratic process is one that we fully support and Police Scotland do support as well. There are quite a number of ways in which individual members can, of course, make their views known to the chief constable or to the SPA, but if there are particular methods that are being proposed by the member, we're doing that. I'm more than happy to meet with the member and discuss those further, but the police will be very open. They are accountable in many different ways, very open to receiving representations, as the member will know from MSPs. I share the member's concerns about some aspects of policing during the proclamation and later during the funeral procession on the Royal Mile. Can I ask the cabinet secretary to confirm? I understand that there are many different police forces on duty then, and just to confirm that Police Scotland had overall control and operational policy control, and if so, and I know what the cabinet secretary says about the debriefing and the review, will the outcome of that review be made public or certainly could you ask the SPA if that can be done? I should say for the member's information that whenever constables or police officers from other jurisdictions come to serve and help under mutual aid arrangements with Police Scotland, control always rests with the chief constable and the Lord Advocate as well. Similarly, we had 1,000 police officers in London and throughout England and Wales to help with events down in that area this week. At that time, they will be under the control of local police chiefs. That is the way it should be done. Of course, in Scotland, it will always be the chief constable that is in control. Just to say, it will be up to the Scottish Police Authority how the discussions that they have with the chief constable are discussed and the extent to which they are made public. The chief constable will provide an update on the policing activities that supported the operation. I have already mentioned the extent to which that will be subject to review, but it will be for the SPA to make those decisions. Despite the mammoth scale of the events, there are clearly a number of small isolated incidents, which no doubt will be further to due scrutiny. Will the justice secretary agree with me that, on the whole, Police Scotland did a tremendous job and should be thanked for their efforts, officers rank and file from right across Scotland supported events here in Edinburgh and in London, but not just them, the army of volunteers and the armed forces who behaved impeccably over the past week? First of all, that is certainly true. It does not mean that the issues that are raised by other members are not significant and important and should be considered. However, I think that the member is exactly right and just probably wrongly to give one example of that, that the police officer, I think that he was a superintendent who drove the motorbike from Balmoral for six hours at a very low speed and then was confronted with the royal mile and the cobbled stones to come down there under control, showed you the level of concentration and ability and expertise that there is within Police Scotland. I think that he did a tremendous job, although, as I have said, that does not mean that we should not explore other issues which have arisen. In her coronation address, her late Majesty Professor Belief in free speech and tolerance, she called it a precious part of our way of life and she asked the British people to cherish it and to practice it. Free speech and the right to peaceful protest are the cornerstones of this liberal democracy, even when we find them distasteful or inappropriate. I am concerned that the cabinet secretary has stressed that he will not speak to specific examples of policing. Surely policing by consent means that activities of Police Scotland should be accountable to this Parliament, and if he will not talk to specific events, in what forum can those concerns be voiced by members of this Parliament? I think that I have already said two or three times that I fully support the right to democratic and peaceful protest. It is also true that, as Jamie Greene pointed out, the number of arrests that happened here is very small compared to the scale of the event that took place. Nevertheless, there are serious issues, but I will just say to Alex Cole-Hamilton, check the legislation. I am not allowed to involve myself, because a decision of this Parliament in 2012 explicitly rejected the idea that ministers or the Parliament would directly control the police. I am not allowed to do that under that legislation, so perhaps he could familiarise himself with that legislation before he asks his next question. We have heard much about the arrests of people who expressed to anti-imperialist or anti-monarchy views, holding signs, carrying eggs. What we have heard less about are the people, mostly young women, who were followed, and those who were held by police had their details taken simply for booing or being near people with anti-monarchy signs. Does the cabinet secretary believe that this behaviour, which has felt threatening and intimidating, is acceptable, especially given that similar concerns were raised less than a year ago during and after COP26? I think that, first of all, my views on the policing of COP26 are on the record. However, as I have said in my original answer, and I have to repeat that it is not appropriate for me to comment on the detail of specific cases, although I do understand that Police Scotland is aware of the incident that the member has mentioned, shared via social media, and that the content of the footage, that video footage, is currently being reviewed. However, I do want to underline our commitment to having strong systems and processes in place for dealing with complaints against the police, and we outlined in the programme for government our intention to introduce a bill on police complaints and misconduct handling later this parliamentary year. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is regarding the impact in Scotland of the reported plans of the UK Government to grant up to 130 new oil and gas exploration licenses. Oil and gas exploration and production, including licensing, remain reserved to the UK Government. The Scottish Government is clear that unlimited extraction of fossil fuels is not consistent with our climate obligations if we are to meet our target of 1.5 degrees under the Paris agreement, and it is not the right solution to the real cost of living crisis that families are facing. Instead of licensing more fossil fuel extraction, the UK Government should be encouraging investment in renewables and supporting a just transition for our energy sector, Scottish households and businesses. In her first weeks in Downing Street, Liz Truss has taken a ricking ball to climate commitments. The UK Government is once again pretending that they can drill their way out of the energy crisis while the world is facing unimaginable suffering from climate breakdown. From installing a fossil fuel fanatic as our energy secretary to making no reference to climate in her first speech on energy policy, this is climate denial at its worst. So can I ask the cabinet secretary, does he agree that the development of the Rosebank oilfield, alongside Cambo and Jackdaw, undermines both the Paris agreement and the Glasgow pact, and we will do nothing to reduce energy bills that people are currently facing? If we look at the focus at the present moment on trying to tackle the cost of living crisis that many households are facing as a result of increasing energy costs, increasing extraction of oil and gas within the North Sea will not address that issue. That is not my view, that is a view of the UK Government. Quasie Quartine, the former energy secretary at the UK Government and the Chancellor of Exchequer, made that point himself during the course of the debate in the House of Commons earlier this year. That is why if we are to try to tackle the underlying causes that are driving household energy bills and non-domestic energy bills at the present moment, the way in which to do that is to decarbonise our energy system and to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels. In doing that, we reduce our potential risk to the malign forces of people like putting in the future. That is why renewable energy is the most effective way in which to do that, not only in delivering cheaper energy for domestic and non-domestic users, but it also delivers energy security and an approach that we can benefit from here in Scotland specifically with an exhilaration of renewable energy projects. Mark Ruskell. I thank the cabinet secretary for that response as well. Yesterday, the UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, called on countries to tax the windfall profits of oil and gas companies to support people struggling with the cost crisis, but also to support communities who are suffering immense loss and damage from climate change around the world. Does the cabinet secretary agree with his proposal? A time when households are facing such high energy bills that are driving quite literally millions of households into fuel poverty and extreme fuel poverty, the focus is not only the need to make sure that we do everything we can to reduce the financial burden it has on them here and now, but also to prevent burdening households with increased fuel costs in the future. That is the real risk of the approach that has been taken by the UK Government in the announcement that they have made to date in tackling this cost of living crisis. The focus, I believe, should be on taxing the windfall profits of those particularly energy companies that are making sizable profits and using that money to offset the costs on households now. It is estimated that those companies will make in the region of £170 billion over the course of the next two years alone. That form of a windfall tax could be used to offset the costs of energy prices in people's homes today. The UK Government should do that, as opposed to burdening the additional costs on to household bills, which is what will happen in the future with the approach that they have taken. Fiona Hyslop Does the cabinet secretary agree that the UK Prime Minister should heed Alex Sharmer, former UK-based secretary of state and COP26 president, who stated that climate and environmental security are now synonymous with energy and national security? Scotland's great asset of a combined energy sector means that sensible use of existing domestic oil and gas licences subject to climate analysis during the energy transition and investment in renewable energy growth, including green hydrogen exports, will provide more energy security to ourselves and our European partners who desperately want green energy supply security from hostile actors than the UK Government, agreeing that 130 new but long-term licences without climate impact analysis. I agree with the president of COP26 Alex Sharmer, because he also stated that countries now understand the benefits of low-cost homegrown renewables, the price of which cannot be manipulated from afar. Recognising renewable energy is the quickest, cheapest, most environmentally friendly approach that we can have to tackling our energy crisis at the present moment while delivering energy security. Scotland is rich with the natural assets to deliver that, not just for our own domestic needs here in Scotland, for the rest of the UK, but it also helps to support the decarbonisation of energy across other parts of Europe. Whether it be in onshore, offshore wind, CCUS battery storage, whether it be hydroelectric, all of which can contribute to our energy transition, and Scotland has the natural benefits to maximise those resources. That is why it is absolutely critical that we see from the UK Government, it is early in this new government's days, but we see an approach that is consistent with the need to drive forward renewable energy to help to reduce energy costs overall. Mark Ruskell strangely forgot to mention Guterres also saying that fossil fuels cannot be shut down overnight. A just transition means leaving no person or country behind. Without new investment in fields like Cambo and Jack Daw and political support from the Scottish Government, production will fall off a cliff, jeopardising the just transition and the 90,000 Scottish jobs that will deliver it and makes us reliant on environmentally worse imports from regimes like putins. Has the Government made an assessment of the financial, economic and environmental impacts of the Scottish Government's plans to abandon our oil and gas sector? If so, will it be published? I will try to deal with some of the facts, because we have been quite consistent in our approach. That is that we should be transitioning away from our dependency on fossil fuels in order to reduce our risk of exposure to the malign forces such as putin. An approach that is agreed by the UK Government is that it is not actually driving forward the policies that will deliver on that as well. That is the point that has been made here. It needs to make sure that we ramp up our production of renewables and other forms of renewable resources both on and offshore in order to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels. Our oil and gas sector, as I have consistently said in this chamber and possibly even to the member, will continue to play an important part in our economy going forward. At the same time, we need to ramp up our renewable developments and that will help to reduce our costs overall. What I think is wrong—what I think is seriously wrong—is the impression that some try to give that by simply extracting some more oil and gas we can in some way reduce our energy costs. The reality is that that will not happen. That is the impression that the UK Government has tried to give with an announcement over the course of the past few days. It simply will not work because all the evidence demonstrates that it will not deliver the type of output that it is needed to do that. The approach by the UK Government and the Scottish Conservatives is, indeed, worrying and wrongheaded. Can I ask the Cabinet Secretary about what the Scottish Government can do to make sure that our planning system in Scotland is robust and fit for purpose? If we are going to see offshore oil and gas and new developments such as Cambo and Jack Donkett in Rosebank coming forward, what can we do to make sure that our planning system is robust because there will be a requirement for onshore assets and infrastructure? What can we do to frustrate the process, if necessary? Most of the licences that are issued nowadays are tied back into existing oil and gas infrastructure that comes on to onshore. New fields have been brought on and tying into existing infrastructure to come onshore. By and large, there are no planning provisions in this for Scottish ministers and the Scottish Government to be involved in the licensing of exploration licences and also for production licences and solo rest with the UK Government. I believe that they should be here in this Parliament. We should be deciding these policies here in this Parliament, given the importance they have to our natural environment and to our fuel security in the future. However, as it largely stands, when it comes to oil and gas production, very often there are no planning requirements for Scottish ministers to be involved in the process.