 The next item of business is a debate on motion 7 0 9 3, in the name of Mari McCallan, on COP 27 outcomes. I would ask those members who would wish to speak in the debate to please press the request to speak buttons. I call on Cabinet Secretary Michael Matheson to speak too and to move the motion around 13 minutes, please, Cabinet Secretary. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Today's debate addresses one of the most important challenges facing not just Scotland but the international community. The latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change painted a stark picture about the damage human beings are causing to the planet. It stated that climate change is already causing widespread disruption in every region in the world. The 1.1 degrees centigrade of warming is resulting in droughts, extreme heat and record floods. There are estimates that in the next decade climate change will drive anywhere between 32 and 132 million more people into extreme poverty. Global warming will jeopardise food security as well as increase heat-related mortality and other serious issues. We are on a journey where risk will escalate quickly with higher temperatures often causing irreversible impact of climate change. Inequity, conflict and development challenges heighten vulnerability to climate risk as well as climate change is increasing the risk of conflict and exacerbating existing inequalities. While we are vulnerable, it is clear that those who have contributed the least to climate change are suffering the worst of its impact. In Scotland, we have taken urgent action. Our targets set out in the 2019 climate change act and voted overwhelmingly in this chamber to be net zero by 2045. We have known from the start that achieving this level of ambition would not be easy and meeting the targets will require a whole of society effort. We also know that the cost of inaction greatly outweighs the cost of acting. We must do all we can now for generations to come. There are no easy options left for us to avoid catastrophic impact. We must now take the difficult decisions that are needed for Scotland to do its part protecting Scottish people and acting in solidarity with those facing loss and damage from climate change across the world. The transition to net zero is not just an environmental imperative but an economic opportunity, one where Scotland can become world-leading and secure first mover advantage in key areas. Scotland, for example, represents the world's largest commercial round for floating offshore wind. We are embracing the opportunity presented by net zero technologies such as renewable energy and the hydrogen economy, prioritising our world-renowned natural capital and building a sustainable and inclusive economy that is resilient to future shocks. I appreciate what the cabinet secretary has given me. Speaking to businesses, what they say is that the public support from Governments—I both Governments in Scotland—is difficult to access. What can the Scottish Government do to ensure that the investment available there reaches those companies that really require to push this new technology forward? It depends on the type of technology in which they are working. For example, if it is looking to help to support inward investment opportunities, it could be through SDI and Scottish Enterprise, on the Highlands of the Highlands and Islands Enterprise or through the South of Scotland Enterprise Agency. It depends on whether it is an inward investment opportunity or an expansion opportunity, but there are relevant bodies that can provide them with support if they are looking at expanding their work in those areas of technology. If the member has some specific examples that he wants to share with me, I am more than happy to take that information away and ensure that he gets a more detailed response. We cannot meet the climate crisis alone. It is a global challenge that requires us to work together as a global community with a shared sense of urgency. The two annual United Nations conferences of parties, both COP 27 on climate last month in Egypt and COP 15 on biodiversity in Montreal starting tomorrow, are key moments for the international community to come together, to build consensus, to commit to taking action and, importantly, to hold each other to account. Over 100 heads of states and governments and 35,000 participants attended COP 27, and negotiations finished two days later than planned. Making this international gathering in Shamolshake was one of the longest and largest Cops ever held. The agenda at COP was packed with opportunities to strengthen and deepen relationships to tackle climate change and for the wider benefit of Scotland. During COP 27, the First Minister and the Minister for Environment and Land Reform held bilateral meetings with a significant number of different parties. That included ministers from across the world and other key stakeholders. Additionally, building on our work in Glasgow to COP 26, we committed to providing a platform to the voices of those traditionally underrepresented at COP events. In order to take this further forward, ministers, including the First Minister, met a range of representatives from youth organisations and civil organisations, particularly those from the global south. There was a huge interest in our transition here in Scotland to renewables, in particular on offshore wind and in green hydrogen, spaces in which Scotland is seen as a world leader. We shared our pioneering model for a just transition. We also used COP to urge our partners to prioritise, as far as possible, an approach to energy security that focuses on sustainability with measures to promote energy efficiency and to accelerate the development of renewable and low-carbon energy. If I could make a little bit further progress, please. What we did at COP 27 or what did COP 27 achieve? COP 27 has seen the clearest acknowledgement to date that the people least responsible for global warming are often the ones suffering the worst consequences, and it is fundamentally a matter of human rights. That recognition led to a watershed agreement at COP 27 to establish a global fund for loss and damage to provide financial assistance to developing countries most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Questions around who will pay into this fund and who will be able to draw from it will still have to be answered and clearly much remains to be resolved. Despite that, the agreement alone is a hugely important achievement after 30 years of lobbying by leaders from countries and communities worst impacted by climate change. It is these leaders through the tenacity and resolve that lies behind this particular breakthrough. Particular recognition must go to Pakistan's climate minister Sherry Riemann, who the First Minister met with ACOT for her ability to bring parties together on the issue and put forward a meaningful proposal on behalf of the G77 and China negotiating group. Last year, Scotland became the first global north government in the world to announce funding to address loss and damage, and we have now increased our commitment to £7 million. As one of the first movers, our action has helped to catalyse a total of over $300 million in international pledges, which demonstrates the progress that has been made in just one year. We also helped to keep the focus on the practicalities of funding loss and damage for which we set the scene at our October loss and damage conference, focusing on practical action. The report from this conference was referenced throughout COP and used to inform the negotiations. How to fund loss and damage in such a way that meets the needs of the most vulnerable communities will be debated over the next year and beyond, as negotiators seek to put the COP 27 loss and damage agreement into practice. However, alongside the success, it is deeply disappointing that the recognition of loss and damage has not been matched by greater action in preventing a worsening of the climate crisis. Keeping 1.5 alive and delivering the fastest possible transition away from fossil fuels is key to preventing greater loss and damage in the future. It is simply not good enough that countries fail to make progress on that agenda and that there has been such a strong pushback on action that we all know is needed if 1.5 degrees is to remain truly within our reach. I am very grateful to the cabinet secretary for making some very important points. If I can bring it back to just transition because it is a really important issue in the closing preliminary session of COP 27, there was considerable support for our fossil fuel phase-out from both the UK and the US and indeed the EU, but here in Scotland he will be aware that stock climate care Scotland is asking for further clarity from the Scottish Government about its policies on fossil fuels, including a target date for phase-out and measures to ensure a just transition in its forthcoming energy strategy. Is minister meeting with the coalition to discuss those points and make such commitments? Members raise an important point, and we have set out very clearly our position on the continued extraction of fossil fuels. The unabated continued extraction of them is not being compatible with achieving the principles of the Paris agreement. It is important that we take forward measures that help to retain those key principles within the Paris agreement. I assure the member that when we publish our energy strategy and just transition plan in the coming weeks, we will set out very clearly how we intend to take that forward here in Scotland. The member will also recognise that the key powers to make decisions in these matters remain reserved to the Government in London, which is why I think that it can automate further progress in these matters if we need to have those powers here in the Scottish Parliament. I will give way to the member, and I am keen to try to finish off with him. Liam Kerr. I am genuinely grateful, cabinet secretary. I read at the weekend that the possible future SNP leader in Westminster, Stephen Flynn, described Nicola Sturgeon's opposition to new North Sea oil and gas fields as crazy. Does the cabinet secretary agree with Stephen Flynn or Nicola Sturgeon? I have not seen such a quote from Stephen Flynn, and if that is the case, then Stephen Flynn is clearly entitled to his view. However, as I am sure the member is wise enough to recognise, he should not always necessarily believe everything that he reads in the newspapers. It is vital that countries recommit themselves to do everything that they can to ensure that we keep 1.5 alive and to build a coalition ahead of COP 28 that protects and drives progress against any further pushback. COP 27 covered a decision that was included mentioned for the first time of nature-based solutions, but otherwise there was little recognition of the need to tackle the twin crises of climate and nature together. We need nature to mitigate the effects of climate change, and nature needs us to manage climate change in order to avoid its collapse. That has to be reflected in outcomes of both the climate and biodiversity cops. COP 15 begins tomorrow in Montreal, and it is vitally important that nations reach an ambitious global agreement on the protection and restoration of nature. I have highlighted this afternoon that, although we have made progress, there is still much more to do. We need to work collectively to meet the international climate change challenge. The Scottish Government will be turning its attention now to making good on opportunities that COP 27 has provided. The global community will be doing the same. Although much remains to be decided about how and who of the funding yet to be established for loss and damage fund, it was a genuine success and a rare positive news story. Nevertheless, COP 27 came to a close with too many of the big decisions being referred to a later date. The goal to limit change to 1.5 remains worryingly distant. We know that women and girls are disproportionately impacted by the climate crisis. That is why Scotland has committed further funding to strengthen women's participation in climate change policy and in decision making. However, with negotiations on gender closing without any resolution, we are still no closer to addressing one of the fundamental inequalities of the climate crisis. COP 27 should energise our ambition at home and abroad. I look forward to hearing the contributions from across the chamber here this afternoon. I move the motion in Mary McCallum's name. If I may pick up where the cabinet secretary left off, there is no doubt that COP 27 did not have perhaps the groundbreaking commitments of COP 26. However, that is not to say that it was not a success, because it did close with a, quote, breakthrough agreement, the Charmail shake implementation plan in which nations reaffirmed their commitment to keep 1.5 alive. They strengthened their resolve to cut emissions and boosted support for finance, technology and capacity building in developing countries. The UK showed further leadership at COP 27. It announced more than £100 million to support developing countries dealing with climate change impacts, tripling funding for adaptation projects to £1.5 billion by 2025 and committing £11.6 billion in international climate change funding. However, COP 27 was never going to match COP 26. Indeed, Professor Peter Thorne, one of the lead authors of the UN report that warned of a cold red for humanity, said that COP 27 was always going to be more of a technical summit. These cops have a natural rhythm, and it is only every four to six years where major progress is expected. Intervening cops achieve much less tangible progress. However, what is crucial at any cop is that agreements and announcements are credible and deliverable, so that the motion rightly loads the agreement between the parties to establish a loss and damage fund. As the cabinet secretary flagged, the First Minister tried to pre-empt that by suggesting that Scotland would put £5 million into its own loss and damage fund. However, when I asked Minister McCallan a few weeks ago what are the eligibility criteria, the application process and the defined outcomes, she replied that she is still designing it. Later, responding to my written question, she confirmed that decisions on how the £5 million loss and damage funding will be allocated are yet to be taken. It turns out that the £2 million scheme that they announced at COP 26 mentioned in the motion has not even been fully allocated yet. It is almost easier to produce sound bites than it is to produce hard data and action. On which note, although it is absolutely right of the cabinet secretary to mention COP 15, some might feel it brave for the Government motion to demand action on the protection of the seas, when last month they told me that they will not respond to the Eclare committee's report on regional marine planning until early in 2023, a report that was published in December 2020. Do not forget that, as the cabinet secretary flagged, this is a Government that, in 2018, put more than 200 policies and proposals into a climate change plan to achieve net zero by 2045 and updated it in 2020. However, he forgot to mention that, when I asked earlier this year how much it will cost to achieve, he told me that the Government does not yet know. What the Cops do show us is that we have to strive towards accurate data. We cannot allow differing political visions or dogma to misinform the public, as, of course, that risks eroding trust. When Mark Ruskell, who is an MSP in a party of government, criticises the COP 27 agreement for lacking any phase-out or even a phase-down of all fossil fuels, says that we do not agree with the UK Government issuing new oil and gas licences. They have to go on to address the fact that Britain's electricity makes over the last four weeks. That is the power that keeps us heated, keeps our lights on, charges our EVs, keeps our cookers working was gas 44.8 per cent, wind 23.7 per cent, nuclear 14.1 per cent, solar, hydro and biomass 10.2 per cent. We already know that the Scottish Government will not allow any new nuclear to be built in Scotland. We also know from the quotes that I gave and the text of the motion that the SNP and Greens want to stop North Sea gas production, but it is blindingly obvious that there is no way renewables can replace those anytime soon, in which case this Government is basically proposing to satisfy our gas needs by importing from places like Qatar, which has two to three times the carbon emissions of that pooled up from the North Sea even before in-tog happens. On the point that the member is making in relation to production of renewable energy, by the same token it would be very difficult and it would take us a considerable amount of time to increase North Sea oil and gas production. That just does not happen overnight. I am not sure if it is totally accurate to say or use the word stopping production. My understanding is that we are seeking a gradual decline. The member for the intervention rather contradicts with the quotes that I put up earlier, but the point is that we all want to see a just transition. The cost to the up to 100,000 workers in or connected to the oil and gas industry around 70,000 of whom are located in Scotland would be considerable if we were to stop right now. We all agree that there needs to be a just transition, as mentioned in the Labour amendment, but that requires us to work with our North Sea industries, not against them. Without BP putting around £12 billion by 2030 into offshore wind, hydrogen, EV charge points and carbon capture, without total energies ploughing over half its R&D budget into pioneering new energies and reducing environmental footprint, without Shell investing between £15 billion and £20 billion into low and zero carbon products and services, without Neptune energy achieving gold status by the UN's environmental programme for their plans to reduce methane emissions, that transition simply is not going to happen. I will take Monica Lennon's intervention. I am very grateful to Liam Kerr. I know that he takes climate emergency very seriously, but on that aspiration around just transition, we must make real. If the Rosebank oil fields go ahead, how does that help a just transition? I am very grateful. The member is right, of course. I take it very seriously indeed. As I know, does she? That is why she will be interested to know that we have to set Rosebank in the context of the bigger picture and that transition that she rightly talks about. I go back to the point about where we get our supply from and the point about keeping it domestic. I also point out that Rosebank is projected to be worth over £8 billion over its lifetime to the domestic UK economy. There are wider economic benefits worth over £24 billion. At its peak, it will create 1,600 UK-based jobs. Of course, I know that the member is concerned about that, but do not forget that Rosebank production emissions will be significantly lower than imports of LNG from across the world, such as Qatar that I mentioned earlier. That is striving for accuracy. Will I have time at the end? A wee bit of time. The member will have a wee bit of time if the member is very quick. Gillian Martin. I am very grateful to Liam Kerr. One of the issues that I have with this sort of debate is about oil and gas. It is about how we extract it and the lower emissions of how we produce it. We fundamentally have to make a differentiation between what oil and gas is used for. We need to stop burning oil and gas—that is the real elephant in the room. It is not the production of it, it is the burning of it. I think that that is a very fair point and well made. The member's point goes towards how we present data, how we put information out into the public realm. That is key. The First Minister needs to not be blithly saying when speaking about this area that under this Government we have a position where our net energy consumption is already provided by renewable energy sources. When anyone who knows or has bothered to inform themselves about the UK's energy mix can say, that is demonstrably and evidentially false. It means not claiming that Scotland has 25 per cent of Europe's offshore wind potential. When ministers had known for years, that was not and never had been accurate. That is particularly egregious given that ministers Sturgeon, Swinney, Todd McPherson, Robertson, Slater and Matheson have all put that out knowingly. Even the SNP MPs, Cowan, Henry, Blackford and Oswald have trotted it out, including one MP who has thrown out this unevidenced, unresearched, misleading data, not once, not twice, but five times in a public forum, including the Houses of Parliament, is a putative new leader, Stephen Flynn MP. There is so much more to say on COP 27, but time is short. My colleagues will look to address other aspects of the motion and amendments. Perhaps COP 27 was not as monumental as the UK led COP 26, but, as we have heard from the UN itself, that is to be expected. What it does show, like all Cops, is that the climate emergency does not recognise borders. This is a global issue that will only be addressed by global action in which we all work together. Indeed, the UN said that COP 27 would be held with, quote, an appreciation of the value of multilateral collective and concerted action as the only means to address this truly global threat. In a rare moment of accuracy, on Saturday, Mr Patrick Harvie was quoted as saying, the whole world is behind the curve on climate. Unusially, he's right, and the solution must therefore be to recognise what has been achieved to ensure that Governments strive to use accurate, evidenced data to avoid putting up borders that just divide our collective efforts and to work together to keep 1.5 alive. That's why I moved the amendment in my name. Thank you, Mr Kerr. Could I remind all members, please, who are wishing to speak in the debate, to ensure that they have in fact pressed the request-to-speak button? I now call on Colin Smith to speak to and to move amendment 7093.1, around seven minutes, please, Mr Smith. Presiding Officer, despite some modest steps forward in losing damage support for climate vulnerable countries at COP 27, we didn't see the transformative leap that we urgently needed. The UN tells us that new pledges agreed in Egypt will take just 1 per cent off global emissions in 2030. Far from keeping 1.5 degrees alive, we are heading for a catastrophic 2.8 degrees. Our planet is hotter than it has been for 125,000 years, yet our world leaders fiddle while the world burns. Despite the admiral efforts of COP 26 president Alex Sharma, there was little leadership from Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, whose most memorable act was to eventually decide to turn up. Just as we needed leadership abroad at COP 27, more than ever, we need leadership here at home. Whether it's a devastating floods in Pakistan or Britain's first 40 degrees days, the accelerating climate crisis affects every one of us abroad and here at home. I have no doubt that the Government has chosen to have this debate before the Climate Change Committee published its assessment tomorrow on our progress to net zero here in Scotland. That tells its own story about what the Government knows that report card is likely to say, a combination of fails and could do better. Take the three big emitters, starting with the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions transport. It is responsible for a third of our emissions, with levels barely below those of 1990. We only met our emissions target in 2020 because a pandemic stopped all of us travelling. As we face that post-pandemic rebound back to car use, the Scottish Government's response has been to axe 240 trains a day—that's 90,000 a year. They've also still not given councils the powers that are secure in the transport bill and, more importantly, the resources that they need to set up and run their own local bus services. At a time, our bus network has been dismantled route by route and bus fares rise and rise. We've seen bus passenger numbers fall by 25 per cent since 2007-08. That's 121 million fewer passenger journeys and fares have risen by nearly 19 per cent in the past five years alone. On electric vehicles, the Climate Change Committee estimates that we'll need at least 30,000 public electric vehicle charging points in Scotland by 2030, yet the Government's own target is just over 4,000 in the next few years. Where is the leadership at home on transport? I'll take an intervention from Mr Rowley. I agree with me that the drag on producing electric vehicle charging points is preventing us from moving to electric vehicles. I absolutely agree with that point and, recently, the BBC Dispatches programme also showed that, of those charging points that we already have, a quarter of them don't even work. There's no incentive there for many communities, particularly in rural areas, yet to move towards electric vehicles. What about heating and buildings? How does the decision by the Scottish Government to cut the energy efficiency budget by £133 million instead of tackling why the poorly designed schemes are not being utilised show leadership when we have a shameful level of fuel poverty in Scotland and we know that properly insulating our homes not only cuts fuel bills but cuts fuel use and therefore our emissions. On the third big emitter, agriculture and land progress still does not go far enough. It's six years since the EU referendum. The clock is ticking towards the end of the transition period and it's ticking when it comes to meeting our climate commitments. The only clock that seems to have stopped since 2016 has been the Government's when it comes to laying out what post Brexit agricultural support will look like. We've had dither, we've had delay, what we haven't had is the detail, the direction that support our farmers and crofters need to properly plan and make the changes. That's not climate leadership. Even in those areas where we have made good progress in cutting emissions, energy production and I recognise the significant progress in renewable energy, we've failed to show the leadership needed to deliver the jobs-led just transition we need. The Scottish Government's low-carbon economic strategy in 2010 promised 130,000 renewable jobs by 2020. We were told that we'd be the Saudi Arabia of renewables, yet the recent Fraser of Allander institute's report estimated that a number of renewable jobs created was just a fifth, 27,000. When we consider which sectors can tackle Scotland's woeful economic growth that can create that greener, fairer country with good-secured jobs, wherever people live in the country, all roads lead to renewables. Our net zero targets are not a barrier to economic growth, they are actually the path towards it. The long-term answer to the energy bills crisis, to the climate crisis, to deliver that jobs growth is not a dash for gas but a sprint for homegrown clean energy, but we don't just need to keep speeding up the race for renewables. For example, properly resourced in Marine Scotland in our council's planning department, so the consent and process recognises the urgency, we need to also spread the benefits. We can't repeat the mistakes of the past, which make none of that the wind turbines, carpet and much of our countryside are even manufactured here in Scotland. We need a proper industrial strategy with clear targets, 100 per cent clean energy, 12 gigawatts of additional onshore wind by 2030, 11 gigawatts of offshore wind four to six gigawatts of solar capacity, with a clear energy route, with a clear timeline for that steady stream of work to give supply chain companies the confidence to invest, with the backing of government investment in Scottish ports and Scottish skills and Scottish factories so that those supply chain jobs come to Scottish firms. That's why Labour has consistently called for every penny raised from the Scotland lease and round to be ring fence for our renewables fund to invest in making our supply chains ready to deliver. The Scottish Government of Offshore Scotland's wind on the cheap, we cannot afford to also offshore the jobs and, Presiding Officer, we shouldn't be offshoring the profits either to largely overseas-owned multinationals. That's why Labour also supports the establishment of a publicly owned energy firm to invest in technology and jobs of the future. It's what Labour and Wales are doing, it's what the next UK Labour Government will do and it's what the SNP and Greens used to want to do but no longer support that. The lack of world leadership at COP 27 should make us all even more determined to show more leadership here at home. We may have ambitious targets cut in emissions by three quarters, by 2030, net zero by 2045 but those targets are meaningless if they are missed targets. Labour will support the Government's motion today but, in moving the amendment in my name, we are urgent Parliament to show leadership, to recognise that we do not yet have the plan, the urgent actions needed to properly play our part in stopping this climate crisis also becoming a climate catastrophe. Thank you very much indeed Mr Smith that I now call Alex Cole-Hamilton who joins us remotely for around six minutes Mr Cole-Hamilton. Thank you very much indeed Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to speak for the Scottish Liberal Democrat and some of this important debate and I thank Mary McKellen and the Scottish Government for securing time for it in the chamber. When referencing the environment, the late South African Bishop and theologian Desmond Tutu once said that 25 years ago people could be excused for not knowing much or doing much about climate change but today we have no excuse and in this the year that he passed those words ring really true. Indeed it goes without saying that the climate crisis is perhaps the most pressing issue of our time so it is right that leaders from across the world come together through COP to put the collective shoulders to the wheel and to be sure as others have noted today there is seven things to be praised in the outcome of the latest conference and much indeed to be praised including a global methane cut pledged to cut emissions by 30% by 2030 in the establishment of a global loss and damage to support the country set to be worse affected by climate change and we have heard much of that in the debate so far this afternoon however the promised action still falls short of what is needed if we are to effectively combat the global climate challenge and as the Scottish Government's motion rightly notes it is disappointing that agreement cannot be reached on extending promises on the phase down of coal use this in itself an unhappy compromise at the last conference at COP of the ideal of phasing coal out altogether to other fossil fuel types as well. Goals for cutting back on fossil fuel for use hands of course been hindered by the world around us particularly by the conflict in Ukraine though this indeed only seems to underline the need to move away from our dependence on oil and gas our energy security depends on that it now seems increasingly likely that the dream of keeping 1.5 alive is sadly dead on arrival with estimates indicating that to achieve this we would need to have global emissions by 2030 that adds a goal well beyond the aspirations of the largest emitting nations and beyond practical reality of many others besides however this obviously does not mean that all hope is lost or that we should give up now every faction of a degree of warming that we can avoid results in a better outcome for our humanity and our planet and presiding officer before COP began I said that Scotland needed new hope when it comes to tackling this climate emergency we need decisive and tangible action not just promises but radical credible policies that will drive down Scotland's emissions and it must be said is much to welcome in the Scottish government's and this parliament's attitude to climate policy the reach of its ambitions we should be proud of the ambitious target to reduce emissions by 75% by 2030 passed into law through the work in part of the Scottish Liberal Democrats and a welcome is the attention already given to areas such as biodiversity to renewables to energy production and heating however there remains a considerable value action gap between the Scottish Government's rhetoric and the promise made of its world leading targets and the reality of its actions Scotland met its emissions reductions for the first and so far only time in 2020 in the context of a national lockdown when everybody was at home leaving the distinct impression that COVID has done more to curb emissions than this government has managed so far last year the climate change committee assessed that the most of the key policy levers are now in the hands of the Scottish Government but promises have not yet turned to action the committee's latest Scottish progress report comes out tomorrow and I fear that the review will not be much improved the government's aims for retrofitting buildings are admirable and could in theory drive down emissions while improving ordinary people's quality of life stimulating the economy and creating new work opportunities there's still no answer on how Scotland is to meet the 31 pound a billion pound gap between the heat and building strategies expected cost and the funding promise and it may be unsurprising then that the retrofitting rollout as so far been woeful and this with Scottish Liberal Democrats research indicating that at the current rate just insulating Scotland's fuel poor households could take in and of itself 300 years a Scotland offshore leasing deals as Colin Smith rightly mentioned were heralded by the Scottish government as revolutionising Scotland's energy sector but they've resulted in Scotland's natural resources being sold off on the cheap while under delivering on supply and chain promises with no phasing there will be insufficient capacity in the Scottish sector to deliver on those projects and and really the Scottish government should not have applied the cap as we have discussed previously meanwhile even though we know it will add some 600,000 tonnes of co2 to Scotland's government footprint the Scottish government continues to doggedly support its Heathrow airport expansion deal pretending officer all of this leaves the inescapable feeling that the environmentalism of the SNP green government is half-hearted, distracted and comes a distant second to its goal of driving forward with independence more than ever we need to urgently address Scotland's role in climate change if we are to meaningfully achieve a just transition this moment calls for focused attention dramatic action not promises and latitudes thank you thank you very much indeed Mr Cole-Hamilton we now move to the open debate I call point of order John Mason. Thank you Presiding Officer can you clarify if we are able to intervene on remote speakers or how we do that? Mr Mason I was intrigued as you were as to why it didn't appear to be flashing on Mr Cole-Hamilton's screen you should be able to make interventions on remote speakers it hasn't functioned I don't think in in this instance as it should be but we'd have to investigate that further but thank you for your point of order and I call point of order cabinet secretary. Can I just check just further to your comments there are we checking at the present moment that if there's anyone else joining remotely that we are in a position where we can intervene on them if we seek to do so and that they will be aware that there's someone in the chamber who's trying to intervene on them. Thank you cabinet secretary that is what we're checking I'm not aware of other colleagues who are intending to participate remotely but whether it's for this debate of future business of the Parliament we'd want to make sure that the system is working as it's intended to do thank you as I said we'll proceed with the opening with the open speakers firstly Audrey Nicholl to be followed by Graham Simpson for around six minutes. Thank you Presiding Officer it hardly seems like a year since Glasgow played host to the COP26 climate conference and welcomed world leaders environmentalists young people and many others invested in protecting our climate and our planet and in April the IPCC warned it was now or never to limit global warming successes at COP26 included the signing of the Glasgow climate pact and development of the Paris agreement rule book providing guidance on how the Paris agreement is delivered 12 months on Egypt has just hosted COP27 in the resort of Charmel shake and against the difficult backdrop of an unprecedented cost of living and energy crisis and Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. COP27 restated the global commitment to tackling climate change progress included a focus on food security for the first time highlighting the importance of safeguarding food supply and only this morning the NFU stated that the UK is walking into a food supply crisis under a perfect storm of low yields supply challenges and soaring energy costs bearing down on farmers across the UK and there was a renewed focus on finance mobilising private finance as a key aspect of global action however the most important breakthrough focused on climate impacts recognising climate change is already adversely affecting many countries and threatens increasing damage and destruction with every additional increment of warming COP27 is seen by many to have been the COP that will go down in history as the UN climate change conference where the breakthrough loss and damage fund was agreed and as the First Minister outlined in her speech during a loss and damage panel the nations that suffer the worst loss and damage continue to be the nations that have done the least in some cases virtually nothing to clock to cause the problem of climate change in the first place the loss and damage fund will assist climate vulnerable countries to address impacts which cannot or have not been adapted to and this important breakthrough demonstrates real progress however it's only the beginning of a difficult process key agreements are still needed on which countries will contribute to the fund how much each country will pay and in which countries will be able to benefit COP27 made clear that discussions on support must run parallel with dialogue on how to both mitigate the impact and protect against climate change through adaptations so there is much work to do the climate change committee report COP27 key outcomes and next steps for the UK sets out the economic damage such as destruction to property and the non economic damage such as loss of cultural heritage that is already affecting communities ecosystems and businesses the devastating floods in Pakistan and Nigeria drought induced famines in Somalia and who couldn't avoid the intense heat waves in Europe this summer all testament to the impact already bearing down on us all but what can a small nation like Scotland realistically achieve in the context of a global climate crisis well I'm delighted Scotland was the first nation to pledge financial support to address loss and damage and I'm aware Scotland saw huge interest at COP27 in our renewable sector I will I'm very grateful just on that five million pound loss and damage fund that is only a quarter of the 20 million pounds earmarked for independence can the member understand why perhaps people might feel the Scottish government has got its priorities wrong Audrey Neckle I thank the member for his intervention but I think that's a discussion for a different day I'm concentrating COP27 at home our ambitious net zero targets mean that we all face hard choices how we travel heat our homes source our food our focus is now rightly on renewable energy and emerging green technologies and already wind power is the cheapest form of power in our energy mix our expertise in oil and gas is an opportunity to deliver our just transition not just because it's an environmental imperative but a significant economic opportunity in my constituency just transition is literally everywhere a pivotal part of our local economy our landscape and our future prosperity frustratingly for the northeast however the UK government's questionable decision making and woeful political instability is hugely detrimental to the northeast Aberdein grampian and chamber of commerce recently reported half of companies surveyed for their latest energy transition report said the current political and regulatory environment was a barrier to diversification and the uncertainty over the acorn cc us project and lack of commitment shown to this vitally important project by the UK is just one example jillie m time i can give you the time back miss nickle i just wanted to flag up to Audrey nickle that us meeting our climate change act commitments is actually dependent on cc us actually been implemented and that we as a country won't actually reach them until the UK government acts on acorn and Scottish cluster Audrey nickle i thank the member for raising that hugely valid point and i note because i've read a little bit about cc us because of its relevance to my constituency that the only body that seems to be dragging its feet on cc us is the UK government who are essentially dimming the lights on our local energy industry so given the £400 billion or so of tax revenue that's flowed to the UK treasury from Scotland over many decades i urged the Scottish government to press the UK government to honour their commitment to Scotland's just transition and tackling global climate change so to conclude presiding officer i am immensely proud of Scotland's ambition leadership and commitment to cop 27 the global south and tackling global child climate change and i look forward to monitoring progress and playing my part within my constituency and beyond to ensure scotland becomes greener cleaner and net zero thank you miss nickle i can form the chamber we are now pretty much out of time so any interventions will have to be accommodated within speaking allocations i call Graham Simpson to be followed by Rona Mackay for up to six minutes mr Simpson. Thank you very much Presiding Officer i've taken part in debates on cop 26 and cop 27 both looking back and looking forward and after cop 26 it looks as though 1.5 might still be alive more than 100 countries signed a pledge to halt and reverse deforestation at least 40 countries agreed to stop using coal while leaders signed a pledge to cut methane emissions by 30 by 2030 i guess there was some hope we could look at the positives but i've got to be honest these cop events look to me like junkets for world leaders and people like susan achon and they don't appear to change anything and after cop 27 i'm not filled with hope as the climate change committee notes while the summit restated no well well while the summit restated the global commitment to tackling climate change in the face of the current energy crisis global emissions remain at record high levels and the world is on track to warming well in excess of two degrees c i can't see that much has been achieved by nicholas sturgeon attending either and even less by a delegation from glasgo city council flying to egypt and i'll take the intervention i just wanted to point out that if susan achon can roll to go over there was to talk about top cop 26 and the actual young people's participation and people from deprived areas involved in cop 26 and she was invited over there to do the same at cop 27 and i would also make the point that if nicholas sturgeon hadn't been there probably wouldn't have had any outcomes from cop 27 particularly in loss and damage loss and damage which was led by the scottish government deputy presiding officer listen i'm sure miss achon had a wonderful time but i don't see that she's achieved very much today's debate should have been held tomorrow because that's when we'll hear from the climate change committee on how scotland is actually doing and you can be fairly certain it will not be a glowing report for while there's been progress in decarbonising our electricity supply there's been precious little in industry transport the biggest emitter as we've already heard and buildings so i'm going to talk about transport the snp scottish government has a rather lofty ambition to cut car mileage by 20 by 20 30 just over seven years away that target was introduced in their climate change plan update of 2020 now if you're going to set such a target and have any hope of reaching it then you're going to have to do some pretty unpopular things like hitting people hard in the pocket which is presumably why the snp have not come up with any actual policies to trigger a change from gas guzzling private vehicles and you'll know presiding officer that the target is just for cars not vans and certainly not lorries but thankfully we have the UK government leading on efforts to decarbonise lorries with glasgo firm hvs being awarded 30 million pounds to develop technology which could see lorries run on hydrogen it's pretty obvious that if you want people to ditch their cars then you will need to provide an alternative unless we want a nation of hermits that might appeal to the greens but in the real world it should mean creating a comprehensive joined up and cheap public transport system of the kind we can only dream of the so-called fair fairs review is nowhere to be seen when it does appear there will be thousands of words of government waffle but i can tell whichever minister here wants to listen it can be boiled down to just two lower fares and maybe another two for all that might get people onto buses and trains but it will take more than lower fares having routes that connect communities rural and urban is vital but we have too many public transport deserts so we should be helping councils to use the powers they now have to organise bus services and we should be looking at train routes to dualling tracks like the east coast bride line we should use technology to have multi mode smart cards and we should treat ferries as buses and offer free travel to under 22s who live on the islands going back to that 2020 2030 cars target there's no point banning the sale of diesel and petrol cars if the infrastructure to replace them isn't there we're a long way off having the number of electric vehicle charges required to produce a seed change according to charge place scotland there are 2,400 charges in scotland but with a target of 30,000 by 2030 we need to install about 400 a month last month we managed eight not 800 eight and of course we know that many of them don't work there's much more to do with buses too and our raging ferries are gas guzzlers with no sign of decarbonising the fleet anytime soon presiding officer the climate change committee report tomorrow will make interesting reading as did their UK wide report also published this month it talks about how targets are still not matched by actions presiding officer for me we shouldn't be patting ourselves on the back here the world is not acting fast enough on climate change and i afraid that includes scotland thank you when i call rona mackay to be followed by ffaisal childry up to six minutes mrs mackay thank you presiding officer we are in the midst of a global climate emergency of that there is no doubt and the need for radical action to save the planet from further damage is understood and agreed by countries throughout the world however we are playing catch up after decades of neglect and denial in all fronts and after the promises made in optimism shown at cop 26 in Glasgow last year by most countries there is a palpable sense of disappointment that cop 27 in Egypt was unable to build in that progress and that the 1.5 degree target was in danger of being ebbed away until contested however despite this disappointment and major concern about the lack of progress i'm proud that scotland unlike Graham Simpson has agreed to establish a fund for loss and damage to smaller countries bearing the brunt of the devastating effects of climate change scotland's the first developed country ever to make a financial contribution and make this commitment presiding officer this is truly yes i just wonder given the point i made earlier about the fact that there are no details there are no outcomes there are no criteria for that loss and damage fund when she expects her government to put that out rona mackay yeah i'm absolutely confident that those details will come out soon and the fact that the commitments being made she is something to be celebrated rather than talked down i would suspect scotland's the first developed country ever to make a financial contribution to this commitment presiding officer it's a truly groundbreaking and it's a testament to 30 years of hard campaigning by the global south and civil society which had until now been ignored by northern countries it's also testament to how our nation always punches above our weight when it comes to taking responsibility ironically and cruelly the countries bearing the brunt of the worst consequences of climate damage are the least responsible for global warming and we recognise that so in scotland we're making great progress on areas of devolved responsibility but urgent action from the UK government is critical to meeting our ambitious climate change targets in scotland the scottish government calls for a coalition of action to be formed ahead of cop 28 and i support that wholeheartedly we can't continue to wait year on year for pledges to be made and often broken i make no mistake rich developed countries have a moral obligation to support those experience in the impacts of the climate crisis in the here and now the total funding scotland has announced may be a seem a small sum in terms of the overall scale of the loss and damage that developing countries face but it sends an important message and it shows just how important the action of smaller governments can be and of course there's a lot of detail to be worked out over the next year but from the inclusion of loss and damage on the agenda to the agreement to establish a fund it this has been a real breakthrough for vulnerable and developing countries. Presiding officer the fact that cop 27 was held in Egypt rightly focused on the human rights obligations in every country and in a similar vein to the world cup in Qatar right now a light has been shone on the host countries less than perfect record and that can only be a good thing. Gender inequalities are exacerbated by the effects of climate change and i'm pleased that a co-design approach with women experiencing climate related harm coupled with this funding will seek to tackle the disproportionate impacts of climate change felt by women and girls and a package of measures to strengthen the role of women from the global south and the climate action was announced at cop 27 by the scottish government it will ensure that more women from the global south can attend and influence crucial climate negotiations including next year's cop 20 in dubai and it will give women human rights defenders from the global south the opportunity to spend several months in scotland where they can continue their work in a place of safety. Presiding officer a few months ago i watched a bbc documentary called big oil versus the world and i highly recommend it to everyone who cares about our planet and you know who hasn't watched it i think it's still available on on catch up but a warning it will make you angry it made me very angry as i watched in disbelief how for the last 50 years half a century oil company bosses ignored scientists and dismissed claims of the damage being done to the planet all in the name of vested interest and greed what legacy have we left our young people in future generations during school visits climate change is the number one topic and i'm ashamed that my generation has let them down and caused them this concern young people from some of the country's already facing the worst impacts of climate change were given the opportunity to attend cop 27 in egypt as part of the scottish government's work to widen access to climate negotiations it's vitally important that countries recommit themselves to doing everything they can to ensure to keep 1.5 alive and to build a coalition ahead of cop 20 that protects and drives progress against any further pushback scotland believes that all levels of government in particular where responsibilities are devolved have a central part to play to deliver the transformative actions needed to halt biodiversity loss across the coming decades and the edinburgh declaration of scotland's call to state parties to hear the voices of over 280 signatories at cop 15 in montreal we need them to take stronger actions and make bolder decisions in the next decade scotland is a country at the forefront of renewable energy and a just transition away from oil and gas and that transition is exemplified by scotland's offshore wind industry with scotland representing the world's largest commercial round for floating offshore wind presiding of sir in conclusion we can and we must do so much more if we're to save our planet for future generations and i'm confident that scotland will do that thank you thank you miss mccay and echo ffosil togery and to be followed by jackey dumbar up to six minutes mr togery thank you presiding officer i'm grateful for this opportunity to reflect on the cause of climate justice the legacy of cop 26 and the discussion that have recently taken place at cop 27 in egypt i was glad to be able to meet with many representatives and delegations from around the world at cop 26 in glasgo last year i had a fruitful discussion with the Bangladeshi delegation about the challenges facing Bangladesh and the way in which scotland and countries in the global south can work together on climate change this includes using scotish technology and expertise to assist in climate mitigation this is increasingly important for countries like Bangladesh and pakistan both of which have seen devastating floods this year weather events which only 20 years ago might have been considered once in a generation or a hundred years are now being seen every year the need for the accelerated timetable of the conference is shown by the accelerated progress of climate disaster around the world i will return to the theme of mitigation shortly but i first want to look at cop 27 itself the parties have finally reached an agreement on a loss and damage fund the work on this which began in glasgo last year acknowledges internationally what has been an obvious truth to many participants for years namely the countries who contributed the list to the climate change are the ones now being largely affected by the climate changes devastating impact we should not underestimate the importance of this acknowledgement it is the necessary starting point for climate justice through this framework loss and damage can be calculated and mitigation can be funded across the world it is a big step but it is not the only step needed for climate justice i'm sure that there are arguments yet to come about the amount that is in the pot and the time it will take to release funding to countries in need and there is another truth that runs parallel to the one i have just mentioned the global north has benefited greatly from the fossil fuels that have caused this damage and is now in the best place for a green transition as a result so the other so other other hand of climate justice must be to ensure that the countries of the global south are not locked out of this transition and have access to renewable themselves unfortunately i fear this part of the climate justice is in danger of being lost despite all the progress on loss and damage we see in cop 27 we see no further progress on phasing out fossil fuels and i fear that without that other side we will never know the true climate justice we will simply be asking the global north to subsidise the global south while it makes the same mistakes this is where the issues of climate mitigation come back into play we must now take mitigation incredibly seriously because in the in the absence of agreement on reducing fossil fuels it will be more necessary than ever before when we see the scale of the damage caused by this year's floods we get an idea of what we might be facing in the future climate refugees already exist but their numbers might become greater than we would dare to imagine if we do not take mitigation effort effort seriously the cross-party group of on Bangladesh recently heard that there could be as many as 18 million climate refugees from Bangladesh in coming decades if the worst climate effects are realised that is the equivalent of the population of the netherland becoming refugees we are fooling ourselves if we do not think such a large flows of people from climate heat regions will have a significant impact on the rest of the world it is in all our interest that this does not happen this means a relentless focus on climate mitigation but it also means reducing fossil fuels and allowing the global south to have its own part in the green revolution i greatly hope that cop 28 regains this focus on reducing fossil fuels for all of us thank you thank you very much indeed mr towdie and now called Jackie the barter to be followed by mark ruskell up to six minutes mr mark thank you president officer as a member of the nzett committee i'm happy to speak in this debate today on the varied outcomes of cop 27 cop 27 will go down in history as the un climate change conference where the loss and damage fund was agreed after decades of pushing this is a momentous victory for the climate vulnerable developing countries the shift in the conversation and in the position of developed countries since cop 26 is remarkable cop 27 has finally seen an acknowledgement by development developed countries that the people least responsible for global warming are the ones suffering its worst consequences crucially it also recognises that rich developed nations have a moral obligation to support those experiencing the impacts of the climate crisis in the here and now and there remains a lot of detail to be worked out over the next year ahead of cop 28 but from the inclusion of loss and damage on the agenda to the agreement to establish a fund this cop has delivered a real breakthrough for vulnerable and developing countries by working with others over the last 12 months to build the momentum scotland should be proud to play its part leading up to this decision it is crucial that parties continue to build on the positive momentum created in charm as challenging discussions on how the new loss and damage fund will work and who will contribute to it financially ensue Presiding officer Scotland in being the first developed country ever to make a financial contribution has been able to play a small part in the loss and damage journey last year Scotland was the first developed nation to pledge finance to address loss and damage with a commitment at cop 26 of £2 million from the climate justice fund other countries like Wallonia and Denmark have now followed suit and we should all be encouraging all economically developed nations to do similar an additional five million of funding was announced by the first minister at the cop 27 climate summit taking the total funding scotland has announced to seven million and while a small sum in terms of the overall scale of the loss and damage that developing countries face it does send out an important international message it shows just how important the action of smaller governments can be in making a huge difference internationally and in encouraging others to do so in virtually everything we do on loss and damage Scotland is trying to ensure that we listen to international perspectives especially the perspectives of the global south while the action of Scotland in our european neighbours is vitally important and indeed has been recognised as being by the likes of the united nations cop 27 was a hectic and sometimes chaotic event the cop advanced some matters but on others failed to drive ambitions towards the sort of climate action required to keep alive the possibility of restricting restricting climate change within the envelope of the paris agreement to 1.5 degrees loss and damage progressed but especially in week two the risk was of going backwards in this cop relative to cop 26 in Glasgow the final cover declaration managed to avoid the worst but it also avoided the best notably disappointing was that the recognition of loss and damage has not been matched by greater action to prevent a worsening of the climate crisis keeping 1.5 alive and delivering the fastest possible transition away from fossil fuels is key to preventing greater loss and damage in the future it is vitally crucial that countries recommit themselves to doing everything they can to ensure we keep 1.5 alive and to building a coalition ahead of cop 28 that protects and drives progress against any further pushback while discussing cop 27 it would be remiss of me not to mention the other cop the biodiversity cop 15 which will begin in montreal tomorrow climate change and nature loss are twin crisis and both must be tackled together the scottish government recognises this and has shown international leadership through the edinburgh declaration to highlight the crucial role that sub nation and local government can play in protecting nature scotland has suffered from high historic levels of nature loss and we face huge challenges today nearly 50 percent of species have decreased in abundance since 1994 and one in nine species are at a risk of national extinction it is expected that cop 15 will result in a new global framework to tackle biodiversity loss with a draft target to protect 30 percent of land and sea for nature by the end of the decade known as the 30 by 30 target the scottish government has already committed to implementing the 30 by 30 target in scotland research conducted by survey found that two thirds of scots support this target and a report published this week by the coalition scottish environment link underlined how important 30 by 30 can be the report said that protected areas are the frontline of defence for nature against growing pressures from human activity and climate change and are vital for supporting our species inhabitants presiding officer in closing we have a climate emergency scotland is doing what we can to tackle that emergency but we need to see a greater effort from the international community and i ask the government to continue to press for this action thank you thank you in my channel called mark rascal to be followed by collect stevenson up to six minutes mr rascal thank you our presiding officer um after cop 27 the odds are now sadly stacked against keeping the world to 1.5 degrees of heating and the UN secretary general described the latest ipcc report as an atlas of human suffering this is what we we now face this is what is now completely inevitable but that threat should really galvanize us because even if 1.5 degrees is now dead then we must redouble our efforts to keep hope and progress alive and it will not be enough to have short-term technical decarbonisation plans that allow businesses usual to simply continue we need a revolution in our thinking as well to look forward to future generations with every action that we take because the footprints we leave today will last for generations to come and it is time i think to join the dots and see the connections between what is already happening to our world europe is currently heating at twice the race of the rest of the planet while the arctic is heating three times faster and every fraction of a degree of arctic temperature increase has seen a more erratic polar jet stream bringing heat waves droughts forest fires and excess deaths across europe a melting arctic permafrost could be game over for this planet if the tipping point is reached then 25 to 40 percent of global carbon budgets could be blown just by permafrost emissions alone we are one people living on one planet with a shared history and a shared future and what happens in the arctic writes the future of a community in Bangladesh and that's why it is so important that COP 27 finally took a critical step forward towards climate reparations for nations at the front line of this crisis with that dedicated fund established for loss and damage but as the conference came to a close we saw that the progress made in Glasgow starts a wither away without delivering the necessary commitments on a phase out from all fossil fuels and despite the leadership of alok shamar at COP 27 and his calls for a phase out of all fossil fuels the Westminster government have continued largely with business as usual despite continuous calls from the international energy agency that in their words there can be no new investments in oil coal and gas we have seen a disastrous expansion of oil and gas licenses in the north sea and potentially even permission being granted this week for a new mega coal mine in the north of england we cannot drill our way out of either the energy cost crisis or the climate emergency the answer to both of those is rapid transition away from oil and gas that delivers for both workers and the planet now COP 26 showed us that when small nations work together that they can lead the world on climate justice that is exactly the message that the launch of the beyond oil and gas alliance sent when a flotilla of countries joined together to plan for a fair and fast phase out of fossil fuels chili fiji and washington were amongst the newest members to join the beyond oil and gas alliance and commit to fossil fuel phase out dates at COP 27 and i expect this government's programme work in understanding our own energy requirements in scotland will lead us to joining this growing network of climate leaders but it's also crucial that the scottish government continues the dialogue with Westminster to join the rising international calls for collective withdrawal from the energy charter treaty which is now clearly beyond reform fossil fuel companies should not be allowed to sue governments for hundreds of millions of pounds if they introduce policies that limit the use of coal oil and gas in line with climate ambitions if there's time in hand you'd have to accommodate it within six months the biodiversity COP starting this week underlines the climate and nature crises are two sides of the same coin and in scotland rising temperatures have threatened some of our most iconic species and the very habitats that can help us naturally capture and store carbon from the atmosphere like peatlands are now under threat causing them to release the carbon they hold so i look forward to the forthcoming scottish by diversity strategy starting to address these twin crises head on now there is much in the scottish government's programme programme for government that has put us on a faster route to net zero from an ambitious heat and building strategy to free bus travel for under 22s which we found out today is now benefiting over half a million young scottes a surgeon tree planting a new deal for wind power however no government is currently going far enough and the UK ccc and the scottish climate assembly have both highlighted the need for faster and more radical change especially in the areas of aviation peatland restoration and diet change and i'm sure like other members that there will be further challenges from the UK cc when they release their scottand update report tomorrow but the challenging and necessary targets set by this parliament will mean that a far more ambitious climate plan must be developed early next year the current plan is already way out of date it doesn't reflect the ambitions of the view house agreement and no option should be off the table in developing the new climate plan the leadership for example shown by the french government this week in banning domestic flights where there is a rail alternative signals the kind of options which need to be considered if we're truly to deliver whether we currently have the powers or not is a different question but what is necessary must be spelled out so presiding officer it's clear that an outdated business as usual model will lead us down a road of no return and i'll keep working as a member of the enzac committee and with greens and government to ensure that scotton delivers the transformative action on climate action that we actually are out of time it's i now call collect stephenson to be followed by brian whittle up to six minutes mr stephenson thank you presiding officer i welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate and after the anticipation and build up to cop 27 the biggest climate meeting of the year is now over the kids of delegates that throng the charmer seek international convention centre for two long weeks have all headed home to recover many fatigued from long hours and sleepless nights as negotiators tried to seal a deal that would move the world forward however the crucial question is whether cop 27 was a success presiding officer first the not so good many consider that cop 27 did not reach what the science is telling us we desperately need with the window of opportunity closing fast on the world's goal of limiting global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees or less there is agreement that cop 27 did far too little on the all important issue of mitigation the urgent need to cut global emissions the case for urgent action keeps getting stronger the latest reports from the intergovernmental panel on climate change make for grim reading about what to expect if we let temperatures rise too much the head of the key negotiating group of developing countries was pakistan which has been dealing with the worst floods in its history leaving 1,717 people dead and costing an estimated 40 billion dollars in damage in 2022 the us in the us there were 15 climate related disasters which each exceeded 1 billion dollars in costs meanwhile in africa according to carbon briefs analysis of disaster records extremely other events have killed at least 4 000 people and affected a further 19 million since the start of 2022 the pressure was therefore on at cop 27 to respond to such disasters attending cop 27 were 112 world leaders and over 300 government ministers something like 27 000 people from governments intergovernmental agencies stakeholders and journalists also attended this was to the backdrop of the UN secretary general general warning us that we needed to cooperate or perish to take urgent action to take us off a highway to climate hell this is really serious warning from the UN a warning underpinned by global scientific evidence and we need to listen to it and yet in the face of our global climate emergency progress on mitigation was modest at best will some delegations pushed hard for stronger commitments on cutting emissions the appetite from some nations mainly the large emitting nations did not seem to be present I therefore ask the Scottish government to do all it can to redouble its efforts to lead by example and pressing for global action on climate mitigation and on reaching the 1.5 degree target. There were however significant advances at cop 27 perhaps most always the agreement to create a loss and damage fund to help the most vulnerable countries this has been a key issue for almost 30 years particularly for small island developing countries I am proud that it was Scotland at cop 26 that started things off with a voluntary contribution of 2 million for loss and damage the additional announcement from the First Minister of an extra 5 million to help the nations most impacted by the implications of climate change is of course welcome more recently Denmark, Austria, New Zealand and Belgium have also made financial commitments to loss and damage now amounting to 244.5 million dollars this makes the final outcome all the more welcome the door is now open for the most vulnerable countries to receive more support a goal has now been set to fully operationalise the fund at cop 28 in a year's time for Scotland's part the funding for loss and damage will enable communities to take direct action to address the impact of climate however we must ensure this funding works as is expected the following five steps are critical quantification the first thing to decide as how much countries will receive in loss and damage the funds must assess accumulated damages and accumulated losses over a specific baseline assessment how will loss and damage be assessed both quantitatively and non-quantatively the funding must take account of indigenous cultural heritage and loss of national national and local ecosystems attribution countries must be supported to monitor and spell out attribution clearly disentangling unfolding impacts from past disaster events are other slow processes processes and natural factors such as salinization and loss of biodiversity must be considered payment monitoring a fund needs to be capitalised it needs to be managed once the mechanics of the funds have been determined we need an impact and monitoring system and finally evaluation and optimisation lessons should be learned from existing climate funds to channel private finance towards low carbon investments I would welcome a commitment from the minister that our funding in scotland will meet these important principles as set out by the UN presiding officer in closing the steps of scotish government is taking are crucial we are leading by example in the face of the global climate emergency but the world must follow suit I asked the scotish government to do all it can in this regard thank you thank you miss Stevenson I now call Brian Whittle to be followed by Katie Clark up to six minutes mr Whittle thank you deputy Presiding Officer and I am delighted to have the opportunity to speak on cop 27 the climate and biodiversity crisis and the response of the scotish government to those crisis the previous cops most of the focus is me on getting big emitters to commit to mission reduction in Glasgow last year the cop 26 president said that the target of no more than 1.5 degrees of global warming was still alive but the pulse was weak prominent talking point at cop 27 of course was the viability of that 1.5 degree target so let's talk about targets those ambitious targets set by the scotish government and voted through by this parliament I want to talk about biodiversity which is often the poor relation and climate change but every bit is important and are bid to tackle climate change now I've used this figure in the chamber before Scotland ranks 212 out of 240 nations assessed for the quality of our nature via biodiversity and tactness we know that when we manage biodiversity that increased carbon sequestration falls because a healthy environment is a productive environment especially in terms of biodiversity and the economy the state of nature scotland 2019 report found that the overall abundance and distribution of scotland species have declined including in the last 10 years and the pressures that drive biodiversity loss are collectively continuing to have a negative impact on nature the report says and I quote there has been no letter from the net loss of nature in scotland despite the scotish government's target to halt nature loss by 2030 targets are not enough action is required the smp green coalition has presided over a species decline including 531 habitats and 603 species in scotland being in poor condition I'm going to use an example here I'm going to use a marine example because we often forget that the marine environment is actually at least as important in tackling climate change and biodiversity decline blue marine foundation suggests that the west of scotland cod population has already declined by 92% since 1991 12 breeding seabird species have declined in abundance by an average of 38% between 1986 and 2016 so what do we need to do to reverse that trend well we need investment we certainly need private investment a key role the government plays in the market is signaling to investors the scotish government can grandstand all the like about how we need to progress towards net zero but if the scotish government are not delivering on the statutory targets then this does not signal positively to investors to stick their financing where we most need it scotish government I missed three annual emissions reduction targets in a row and we're only successfully meeting the 2012 target due to the travel restrictions related to the temporary Covid-19 pandemic an analysis of COP 27 by institutional shareholder services equid this confusion that many businesses are experiencing regarding investment into net zero and net zero policies stating and again a quote by demonstrating a lack of credible commitment to their pledges governments are sending conflicting signals to investors who may conclude that they should scale back their own ambitions and focus on adaptation instead now Liam Kerr raised the issue of the oil and gas sector and it is something of much debate in here and it should be said that the international panel on climate change r6 report sets for temperature rises to be kept within that one and a half degrees global oil must must decrease by 60% and gas by 45% by 2050 and I would note here they don't advocate for the end of fossil fuel entirely but I do think that they need a consistent reduction by 2050 and of course the target should be to eliminate fossil fuels entirely but this needs to be done in a gradual and sensible way that ensures we protect jobs and deliver a real future for the energy sector and the northeast to do this we need to actively and transparently engage with the fossil fuel sector encourage them to move faster and invest more in the renewable sector rather than meeting them with demands are constantly trying to shame them that is not how you deliver tangible working relationships a fact I think it's completely lost with the SNP green government the international panel on climate change r6 report is also clear that fossil fuels as we reduce fossil fuels we need to replace them with widespread electrification improved energy efficiency and use of alternative fuels such as hydrogen the Scottish government needs a comprehensive energy plan that includes smart and in targeted investment not scattered investment where the level of investment does not have any real impact and it needs to get rid of emerging sorry it needs to get rid of the red tape and release funds to those companies at the forefront of emerging technology or be risk losing the great opportunity scotland has to drive a global green economy these could be hydrogen and solar or nuclear and the Scottish government does have to review its blinkered and blank blank at objection to the potential of nuclear energy our current significant investment into wind does leave us vulnerable if the wind does not blow the climate change committee suggests that action to address the rising cost of living should be aligned with net zero these remain an urgent need for the equivocal equivalent action to reduce demand for fossil fuels to reduce emissions and limit energy bills and then i wanted to talk quickly about net zero housing as reported in the herald three days ago the co-leader for the scottish screens and minister for housing told the herald that scotland's making the switch to heating buildings without relying on fossil fuels that will need cost a cost of 33 billion too late now i would say he is right but he's not the right person to lead this given that his party don't exactly embrace the private sector and i will conclude a deputy besiring officer to suggest it's not enough to have ambition we must have an action plan with measurable and accountable targets that address the scale of the crisis we are facing the scottish government needs to stop lecturing the rest of the world and focus on delivery and our park to drive the drive to keep 1.5 alive and finally targets without come outcomes are just hot air if we miss the targets then 1.5 degrees will be missed the scottish government needs to allow scotland to demonstrate what can be achieved rather than talk about what could be achieved thank you mr thank you officer thank you and now call casey clerks we followed by paul mcleanon and we have no time in the hand speeches of six minutes please thank you Presiding Officer we are in the midst of an emergency it may well be now probably too late to keep 1.5 alive but that means even more than ever we need unprecedented and coordinated action from governments the intergovernmental panel on climate just climate change said that without immediate and deep emissions reductions across all sectors it will be impossible to contain average global temperatures rises to 1.5 above pre-industrial levels they said that last year and unfortunately there is no sign that those deep emission reductions are taking place scotland has of course repeatedly failed to meet our own annual targets the commitment at cop 27 to give formal recognition to the fact of loss and damage as a result of the climate emergency and to establish a fund under the united nations framework convention of climate change is of course a positive and overdue step because it's widely accepted that those most acutely affected by the impacts of the climate emergency have contributed the least to the climate emergency and I welcome the Scottish Government's pledge of £2 million to loss and damage through the climate justice fund however I have absolutely no doubt that the ministers accept that the amount committed is not a true reflection of the climate damage created by Scotland's past or indeed present emissions that this sum is mainly symbolic and that this must only be the start of a sustained and focused long-term commitment to ensure that Governments and indeed Governments at both a UK and a Scottish level deliver for climate vulnerable countries by ensuring commitments on adaption and loss and that damage is honoured we know that between 1988 and 2015 an estimated 100 companies producing fossil fuels excluding agriculture methane were responsible for 71% of all global emissions these companies are overwhelmingly based in the so-called global north these injustices only compound the long history of colonisation and oppression many of these countries have suffered and Fausal Choudry spoke knowledgeably using his own experience and indeed his involvement in the cross-party group on Bangladesh about that whilst the government is right to express disappointment in their motion in relation to lack of action I think it is also appropriate in this place that we talk about the Scottish Government's own lack of action on this issue the Scottish Government's own energy strategy has noted that there are significant opportunities in the North Sea with up to 20 billion barrels of oil equivalent remaining I taken board the point made that it's about whether those oil barrels are burnt but in October when I asked the cabinet secretary to make a clear public stance against the proposed Rosebank oilfield development his response was that the Scottish Government's opposition to Rosebank was conditional that it should be subject to a rigorous climate compatibility checkpoint to ensure that it's consistent with emissions reductions targets this simply isn't good enough we need to address fossil fuel production and deliver local renewable production particularly through municipal and community production but at a Scottish level we also need to look at initiatives such as that proposed by Colin Smyth and indeed proposed in the Scottish Labour motion of a publicly owned energy company I will I'm grateful to the member for giving way just to clarify the advice in the position which the Scottish government has taken on new oil and gas production on a compatibility checkpoint is in line with the independent advice that we've received from the Committee on Climate Change who have said that there should be a rigorous robust climate compatibility checkpoint before any production is taken forward can I just clarify whether the Labour Party support the position of the Committee on Climate Change or whether their position is that there should be absolutely no new oil and gas developments end of Mr Katie Clark I've got very limited time so I won't be able to give the minister a full response but I think that the minister is very well aware of the scale of the challenge and that we cannot carry on like this and that we cannot continue to extract oil and glass in the way that we have. The international energy agency has repeatedly stated that rejecting any new oil or gas developments are a bare minimum requirement if the world wants to reach net zero emissions by 2050 and we're going in the wrong direction and I hope that the Scottish government will accept that. A Friends of the Earth report last year found that North Sea oil production increased 15% since the climate emergency had declared. We need to take radical action. People and planet demand more urgent action and I look forward I'm fortunate I've not been able to respond to the minister fully due to lack of time and I'm now over time but I hope that in the debates that take place in this place that we agree more radical action for the future. Thank you Ms Clark and I now call Paul MacLennan who will be the last speaker in the open debate up to six minutes please Mr MacLennan. Thank you Presiding Officer. Greenhouse gas emissions keep growing, global temperatures keep rising and our planet is fast approaching tipping points that will make climate chaos irreversible. We are on a highway to climate health with our foot on accelerator Antonio Quiterrey's secretary general of the United Nations. There can be no effective climate policy without the peace. There are still too many for whom climate change is just rhetoric or marketing but not real action. They are the ones who start wars of aggression when the planet can afford a single gun ship because it needs global joint action. Vladimir Zelensky, president of Ukraine. That's the global context of COP 27. This was the first UN climate summit in the global south for six years. COP 27 was billed as the implementation COP where rhetoric would be turned into action, particularly in terms of support for countries on the front lines of the crisis. COP 27 did not deliver on these expectations. To say nothing of what is needed to stop complete climate breakdown it did secure some important wins, in particular a loss and damage fund and a renewed emphasis on equity. We still need the world to agree a new long-term goal for climate finance and whether so-called emissions removals and avoidance will be allowed to be traded in Paris agreement carbon markets. On loss and damage, the securing of the loss and damage fund to address now unavoidable impacts of climate change was a huge win for the global south countries who made this their priority issue at COP 27. COP 27 has seen acknowledgement finally by developed countries that the people at least, least responsible for global warming, are the ones suffering its worst consequences. There was considerable resistance from wealthy historical polluters establishing this fund, with those countries promoting technical assistance and deeply inadequate insurance schemes instead. The Scottish Government played an important role in championing a loss and damage fund, and civil society campaigning was key in securing this vital win. Worse than with others, over the past 12 months to build momentum, Scotland should be proud to play its part leading up to this decision. Secretary General Antonio Cinteri said of Scotland, Scotland is one of the first international actors that has determined money for loss and damage. That is a very important point for developing countries, and I would like to say how much I appreciate the Scottish effort in this regard. On keeping 1.5C alive, it is deeply disappointing that the recognition of loss and damage has not been matched by greater action to prevent the worsening of the climate crisis. Despite 26 years of UN climate negotiations, emissions are still rising. Despite all the hype around keeping 1.5 alive at the Glasgow summit last year, the world is on course for 2.8 rise or more. In recognition of that, countries were asked to volunteer to update their pledges to cut emissions ahead of COP 27. Updated pledges reduced emissions in 2030 by only 1 per cent, 1 per cent. Despite leading the calls on this as outgoing president of COP26, the UK Government failed to increase its own commitments. The next official round of nationally determined contributions in DCs climate action pledges under the Paris agreement are not due until 2030. That is another eight years away, far too late to stop climate breakdown. Analysis of Paris agreement pledges show that the rich historical polluters are not doing anywhere near enough their fair share of climate action based on remaining carbon budgets and UNFCCC principles of equity in common, but differentiated responsibility with many global south countries committed to undertaking their fair share or more of the action. Rich polluters are gambling with the highest stakes imaginable and running down the clock on 1.5 by failing to cut their own emissions in line with their own obligations and failing to deliver their financial obligations. They are shifting the responsibility once more on to the shoulders of countries who have done the least to cause a problem and are on the front line of impacts. Two weeks ago, I spoke in the member's debate on the Fraser of Allander economic impact of Scotland's renewable energy sector. Scotland's renewable energy industry and its supply chain support more than 27,000 full-time equivalent jobs and generate £5.6 billion of input in 2020. Onshore wind has a largest input, generating nearly £2.5 billion with offshore and hydro, both supporting more than £1 billion output together. The Scottish Government will soon be unveiling its energy strategy and just transition strategy. Those will be ambitious and move us towards net zero. Scotland needs to continue to develop the existing renewable revolution under way. The supply chain needs to increase the required capacity to deliver skills and manufacturing to service all our renewable energy projects. With a short-term offshore wind pipeline of 6.9 gigawatts and a potential of more than 10 gigawatts of onshore wind, the existing pipeline of renewable energy projects to be delivered in Scotland is extensive. I want to close with two other quotes from COP27. This is from William Ruto, President of Kenya. In the face of impending catastrophe, whose warning signs are already unbearably disastrous, weak action is unwise, and no action is dangerous. In the final words from Marcella Van der Leyen, President of the European Commission, the global fossil fuel crisis must be a game changer. Let's not just take the highway to hell, but let's earn a clean ticket to heaven. The stakes couldn't be any higher. We will now move to closing speeches. I call Mercedes Villalba to close on behalf of Scottish Labour up to six minutes. I am pleased to have this opportunity to close the debate on COP27 outcomes for Labour, because climate change is an issue that I am passionate about tackling. Like poverty, climate change is an issue of inequality, of injustice, which hits working-class people hardest and which is caused by political choices that benefit and have benefited the super rich. In closing for Labour today, it gives me the opportunity to summarise and to reiterate our position in this debate. Before I do so, I would like to spend some time commenting on the Scottish Government's motion and on the amendment put forward by the Conservative Party. While I have to say that it is a stretched too far to claim, as Gillian Martin seemed to, that there would be no outcomes from COP27 if Scotland's First Minister hadn't been there, there is much within the motion from the Government that Labour is supporting today. It is fair to say that the loss and damage fund is an important step forward in tackling climate change and challenging the injustice of climate change. As my colleague Faisal Chowdery highlighted, the global inequality of how those whose economies have benefited most from fossil fuels has had relatively little impact compared with those whose resources have been exploited not just in the recent past but also throughout the long history of colonialism, as my colleague Katie Clark highlighted. We see time and again that those who are most acutely impacted by the climate emergency have contributed the least to climate change. It is right that we tackle this injustice and it is right that we seek to address through the loss and damage fund. Labour also supports within the Government's motion the sentiment around the phase down of unabated coal use and other fossil fuels and to ensuring that human rights are fully respected and to protect on human rights. Can I get the time back? I am afraid that I am not able to take the intervention. We support the ambition of protecting 30 per cent of land and seas by 2030 but targets are not enough when tackling the climate and nature emergencies. We need to see action and delivery as our amendment highlights. We will not be supporting the Tory amendment today because it removes crucial lines on the transition away from fossil fuels. That is not to say that we do not support the sentiment as we did with the Scottish Government motion around human rights and protecting human rights right across the world. I was pleased to see that in the Conservative Party's amendment today. The Conservative Party, which we have heard today from Liam Kerr, said that they want a just transition, like all of us want a just transition. The question that I always have when I hear Conservative Members speaking about a just transition is, is a just transition for who? Will it be for ordinary workers and householders through a green industrial strategy that invests in public services or are they talking about a just transition for private corporations, for oil multinationals, seeking to protect their profits? I am afraid that I do not have time in hand. However, as I have said, there is an element of the amendment that we support around protecting human rights across the world. There have been elements from today's debate that we would support thinking back to comments from Graham Simpson about having lower bus fares for all, duwling, train tracks—I am sure that he will correct me if I am wrong. I think that I heard in proposed that we offer free ferry travel to under-22s who live on the islands. Those kinds of investments into our communities, in public services, are things that Labour supports and that we would like to see more of. I would be interested to hear to see if their colleagues in Westminster will support those kinds of proposals. In my final minute, I would like to move to Labour's amendment. We have taken the decision to support the Government's motion and to add an amendment of our own on the end. I hope that the Government will be able to support our amendment because it is important that we have on the record an acknowledgement that we are not in Scotland currently meeting our own annual targets to cut emissions, despite the fact that we are very well placed to do so. If we had a socialist green new deal that used every lever to redistribute wealth through job creation in a suite of new public services, we could drastically reduce our emissions in this country. A public energy company that would generate renewable energy would also provide a low cost to consumers and sectoral collective bargaining for workers. Likewise, council-run bus companies would lower the cost to consumers and improve workers' rights to the workers involved. We have heard often from the Government that these kinds of policies are not possible because of the fixed budget. I think that we heard this argument from them. Ms Villalbo, you have got five seconds left. Basically, it is not good enough for the Government to say that we do not have the power or the wealth or the skills. We have all of those things. The only thing that we do not have is a Government with a socialist ambition to redistribute wealth and power, so that is why we need to work as an economy that only Labour in Scotland can deliver. I now call on Maurice Golden to close on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives, up to seven minutes, please, Mr Golden. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. This is a welcome opportunity for Parliament to discuss climate change, something that it does not do nearly enough in my opinion. I am going to begin today by highlighting some of the important contributions that we have heard this afternoon. I think that there is consensus on tackling climate change and tackling it faster. The cabinet secretary highlighted that this is a global challenge that we work together as a global community with a shared sense of urgency and described the COP 27 agreement as a watershed agreement. Liam Kerr pointed to a lot of talk domestically and not enough action and said we all agree that we want a just transition. Graham Simpson on transport primarily described the fact that moving people from petrol and diesel cars requires infrastructure, and that last month, in terms of moving to those electric cars, just eight out of the target 4,000 chargers were put in place—a considerable amount of a shortfall. Colin Smith described the possibility of the catastrophic 2.8-degree rise and flagged the major sectors that we need to take action in. I should at this point say that we will be supporting the Labour amendment today. Alex Cole-Hamilton described the need for radical and credible policies. Unfortunately, he was not able to take my intervention where I was going to ask him where he thought the Scottish Government policies were in that category. He also mentioned that insulating fuel port houses could take up to 300 years. Audrey Nicol highlighted that COP 27 was a beginning of a difficult process, and we had further contributions along those lines from Rona Mackay, Jackie Dabar and Collette Stevenson. Finally, Mark Ruskell talked about being stacked against the world keeping to 1.5 degrees and that we need some revolutionary thinking. The threat posed by climate change is more pressing than ever. According to the IPCC, approximately 40 per cent of the world's population is highly vulnerable to climate change impacts. In Pakistan, catastrophic floods submerged a third of the country, killed over 1,700 people and damaged or destroyed 2 million homes, a point made by Foisal Choudry, who also referenced Blangladesh. In Europe, the world health organisation estimates at least 15,000 deaths from heat waves this year, heat waves caused by temperatures that will be, I quote, virtually impossible without climate change, according to the World Weather Attribution Group. In Scotland, we could see heat-related deaths rise by more than 100 per year by 2050. They also say that we could expect homes and businesses to be damaged more frequently as a result of severe flooding. It concerns everyone if efforts to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees fail. To keep that goal viable, there must be a 43 per cent reduction in greenhouse gases by 2030 versus 2019 levels. It was welcome to see COP 27 reaffirm the commitment to the 1.5-degree limit, but frustrating that global ambition to reduce emissions only saw limited progress according to the UK Committee on Climate Change. Nevertheless, COP 27 gave us a glimmer of hope, especially at a national level. More countries signed the global methane pledge, taking the total to 150. India formalised its COP 26 pledges. Britain strengthened plans for delivering its 2030 emissions target, and Mexico, Turkey and Australia increased their 2030 targets. It is also worse noting that Australia follows Britain's lead and set its net zero target in law. COP 27, Britain announced more than £100 million to support developing countries dealing with climate change impacts. That includes over 65 million investment in green tech and clean energy in Kenya and Egypt. I want to say a bit more about adaption funding, since it was a key issue at COP 27. It is estimated that climate change measures could cost developing countries anywhere up to £340 billion a year. It is significant that there was an agreement to establish a loss in damage fund to address those impacts, but there is still so much to decide who pays for the fund, how much and who will benefit, but that should not distract from the significance of the agreement. COP 27 also saw an endorsement of nature-based solutions. Such measures can play an important role in both mitigation and adaption efforts. For example, the Bahamas is allowing marine conservation projects to sell blue carbon credits, offering an adaption mechanism generating new revenue and helping to protect local ecosystems. Nature-based solutions are important in Scotland, too, but progress is poor. Take peatland. The SNP Green Coalition has a target to restore 20,000 hectares of degraded peatland each year. It is an excellent carbon sink, so we all want it to succeed, but they did not even manage to restore a quarter of that target last year. Or look at forestry. The Woodland Trust estimates that around £500 million is needed to restore and expand Scotland's rainforest. The SNP Greens have stumped up less than 1 per cent of that. Of course, they have missed their own emissions targets three years running in 2017 and 2019. Add to that failures to make legal clean air targets, international biodiversity targets, green jobs targets, recycling targets, which will not be met for 680 years, you have a catalogue of failures. If Scotland is to meet its climate goals, the SNP Greens must start delivering, not just for them, for all of us and also working with the UK Government. That is the lessons from COP, consensus and co-operation. I now call on Lawrence Slater to wind up the debate on behalf of the Scottish Government up to nine minutes, please minister. Thank you very much to all members for contributing to this debate today. There is, I think, recognition across this chamber that COP 27 was the first COP at which the impact of climate change on vulnerable nations finally received the recognition that was long overdue. While much remains to be decided about the how and the who, the establishment of the loss and damage fund was a genuine success and a rare positive news story. There were undeniable disappointments, in particular the failure to agree and deliver on the action that is needed unavoidable if the goal of 1.5 degrees is to remain within reach. There is one area on which all parties agreed, and that is the need for urgency of action. 2022 has seen growing climate-induced extreme weather and disasters emphasising the immediacy of the threat, not just in Pakistan and East Africa, but to us all. We are code red on climate. I wonder if the minister could provide this chamber with her assessment of the SNP's Government's ability to meet its targets prior to 2021, when she took office. Thank you very much. I am not sure whether the member is asking for historical data or progress this year, but the Government is working very hard on concrete actions to deliver. Examples on the table are our £0.5 billion just transition fund in the north east, which is going to projects to create those new jobs and to support that new technology. Free bus travel for under-22s, our nature restoration fund, recycling improvement fund—it goes on and on and on—and our commitments to tackling the climate crisis. Does she think that cutting the budget for Marine Scotland will help us to meet our climate targets? We all know that we have to make sure that our budget stretches, and that sometimes means difficult decisions. We have to make sure that we are getting the best impact for every pound that is spent. Each pound can only be spent once, and the member will know our need to balance our budgets. Just to comment on the amendments today, there are some positive contributions in the Scottish Labour amendment. We absolutely agree with the need to realise Scotland's potential for renewables and to secure as much of that benefit as possible from this industry for Scotland. However, as usual, Labour is ignoring the actual powers of the Scottish Government. Realising our renewables potential must be a joint endeavour with the UK Government doing their bit, too. For example, to ensure that proper support is in place for emerging technologies where Scotland could lead, such as tidal and reducing connection and transmission costs. I am grateful to the minister for giving way. She will be aware of common will and its important policy work on democratising energy. There was a commitment from the Greens and the SNP around the public ownership of energy generation. There has been progress in Wales. I wonder whether ministers are speaking to counterparts in the Welsh Government to see where we can learn from that and try to get the action that many of us want to see. I am absolutely aware of what is going on in Wales. While it is an interesting project, the scale of it is very small and would do very little to tackle our renewable energy challenges in Scotland. Mr Kerr makes an important point with his amendment that meeting our targets requires collaboration across our borders. That means that the UK Government has to do its bit, too. It means more support for the renewable sector in Scotland through, for example, delivering a fair GB transmission charging regime that enables the rapid growth and deployment of renewables. It means that staying true to their own commitments. Are the Tory Government in Westminster really going to consent to a new coal mine in Cumbria, for example? Mr Kerr's amendment also removes the references to the critical COP 15 talks that start this week. Addressing the climate and nature crises must go hand in hand. Difficult decisions are ahead if we are to keep 1.5 alive. The knock-on effects of the war in Ukraine, a cost-of-living crisis driven particularly by energy prices and the lasting impacts of Covid-19 teach us that we should push forward with our energy transition ambitions if we are to be resilient to global shocks. I am very grateful and I respect the fact that the minister has taken now four interventions. Just on a point of order, my amendment does not remove any reference to COP 15, but my intervention—we heard in this debate earlier on about the importance of the ACORN project—the Green Party is on record as being reportedly opposed to carbon capture utilisation in storage. Does the minister agree with her party or the Government that she is a member of? Thank you very much to the member for the intervention. The Committee on Climate Change does account for the use of CCUS in its calculations. The Scottish Greens and other green parties are sceptical of the practical implementation of CCUS because some of this technology is untested. Scotland's participation at COP 27 and the meetings held with leaders and ministers from multiple continents proved that we have a lot to offer and to learn from others. The huge interest in our just transition to net zero, in particular our expertise in offshore wind and green hydrogen, shows that Scotland really is seen as a world leader on these technologies. There is no doubt that Scotland must move away from fossil fuels as quickly as a just transition will effectively and fairly allow. Our highly skilled oil and gas workforce has long been at the forefront of energy innovation, and that is why we see a bright future ahead for a revitalised North Sea economy that drives a net zero energy system, as well as huge employment opportunities for this innovative workforce in the energy transition. Let's be clear that we are still talking about an end date. Unlimited extraction of fossil fuels is fundamentally incompatible with our climate obligations. Ultimately, oil and gas licensing regulation and taxation is reserved to the UK Government, and we need to see more investment in renewables and energy transition from our Westminster colleagues. We have already shown that our actions can move the dial internationally. Loss and damage was a central issue in Egypt, and Scotland has played a small but significant role in this space. The decision to establish a fund is the result of over three decades of hard work by vulnerable nations and small island states, but Scotland's on-going commitment turned up the pressure on that decision in a way that no developed country had done before. We are acting on a world stage. I will be attending COP 15 this week where I will emphasise the twin crises and the inexorable link between biodiversity loss and climate change. I will launch our new draft biodiversity strategy and, through the Edinburgh process and Edinburgh declaration, promote adoption of the subnational plan of action. Those actions will showcase nature-based solutions in Scotland and how they are contributing to reducing biodiversity loss—no, I'm sorry, I'm running out of time—and meeting our net zero target. Our space on the world stage should encourage and motivate our ambitions at home. Scotland's international presence is an opportunity to maximise our impact to see the change we affect at home multiplied elsewhere. We are a small country, but our efforts can and do influence great global change. I wanted to follow up on the question that we had from Liam Kerr about the allocation and spending of the loss and damage fund from Scotland. 1.7 million pounds of the £2 million has been allocated—those funds have been spent—and are in use currently in Malawi, the Pacific Islands and Bangladesh that money is being spent on the ground. The £5 million will be allocated based on community-led needs assessments in consultation with stakeholders experiencing loss and damage, as will monitoring and evaluation. The £5 million loss and damage commitment at COP 27 has been committed specifically to address non-economic, slow asset loss and damage that have so far had insufficient global attention. The £5 million will be allocated and spent according to a four-stage methodology. That methodology has been tested extensively with the global community and was discussed at length at the loss and damage conference that Scotland hosted. That concludes the debate on COP 27 outcomes. It is now time to move on to the next item of business. I will allow a very short pause to enable members to change position sydd wedi bod sy'n cael ei wneud.