Chamber and committees

Does George Tarvit want to add anything?

To pick up on that last point, we are aware—and we had some evidence on this from the previous panel of witnesses—that there is a lot of inconsistency among local authorities. The majority of them do not have area-wide targets, although the majority do have targets for their own emissions. What are your organisations doing to develop a more coherent approach across local authorities, in order to achieve a common understanding of net zero and how targets should be applied? That question goes first to Gail Macgregor to answer from a COSLA perspective.

You are saying that such bottom-up collaboration will help to build consistency.

Absolutely—and I have been a CPG convener in the past. I have resisted taking on too many CPGs, both as a member and in any kind of convening role, but I feel that this group represents a genuine space where there is interest and enthusiasm for the topics that will be covered. I am prepared, and my office is prepared, to work with the secretariat and make the group a success.

Thank you very much, convener.

Yes. The subject is the nature and climate emergencies. There has been a lot of discussion among members, particularly in the previous parliamentary session, about the interrelationship between those emergencies, how the climate crisis is affecting nature and how some of the solutions to mitigate climate change can come from nature—for example, blue carbon and peatland restoration. It is about bringing together conversations involving people who work in different subject committees across the Parliament and in different spaces.

From discussion with non-governmental organisations and other stakeholders, we thought that creating a CPG space in which we could explore some of the interrelationships between the climate emergency and the nature emergency would make sense. We had initial informal meetings to discuss the way forward, and that brought good cross-party interest. That interest has continued into this session, including among members who now sit on the Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee and the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee in Parliament.

I think that it will be a good cross-party group. I have been a convener of previous cross-party groups and a member of this committee, and I recognise that a lot of cross-party groups are currently in operation. We will be looking at topics that interest a wide variety of members and also at the agendas of other cross-party groups to see whether joint meetings on areas of mutual interest are possible.

Yes.

We have not reached out on the detail of the work programmes of each CPG. We are aware of their interests but, to be honest, the nature and climate emergencies are a very specific area. Although, for example, the cross-party group on crofting might be interested in the impact of climate change, it would not cover that and the nature emergency as specific topics.

Members of the proposed group would be open to exploring opportunities for joint meetings and cross-over, but I do not see anything in the remit of the other groups that is explicitly on the topic of the nature and climate emergencies.

No. I think that some members who were at the initial meeting and who are members of other CPGs would be interested in raising the potential for meeting topics that might be of interest to those CPGs as well. However, I think that the remit is pretty clear. If we brought together a programme of potential events, we would reach out to others and see whether there was interest in hosting some of the events jointly. There is a clear focus on the nature and climate emergencies. That space for discussion does not exist at the moment. To get a joined-up debate and interest going, such a CPG would—

That is the initial set of organisations that have come together to propose the new group. They have a specific interest around climate, nature and the relationships between the two. However, membership of the group would be open, so if other organisations were interested in coming into the space, they would be welcome to do so. We would welcome broad conversations about how we might tackle both emergencies together. If the process is to be meaningful, we will need those groups to come in to enable us to have proper debate and discussion.