Chamber and committees

I think all my questions about franchising and municipalisation have been answered, but I have a final question if that is okay.

We now have the strategic framework and delivery plan in relation to the other crisis—the biodiversity and nature crisis. Do you see key opportunities there? I highlight aquaculture in particular, because we still see widespread community concern about its growth in Scotland. There is a view that it is not being appropriately regulated, and there are criticisms of CES and others in that regard. Given that challenge, and other challenges and opportunities, could and should CES be doing more to deliver our biodiversity strategy?

Yes—I am sorry about that.

That was a helpful piece of information, convener. I am content to agree with the Scottish Government’s recommendation.

However, I was a bit alarmed by the letter that we received from the cabinet secretary, particularly the paragraph about the national air pollution control programme legislation, which is not included in this measure to retain EU law. The cabinet secretary says:

“this is the last opportunity to seek preservation of the air quality provisions through a UK SI. By choosing to omit these air quality provisions ... the UK Government is creating unnecessary uncertainty while it develops replacement ... proposals.”

She also says:

“Although the provisions fall within devolved competence in relation to air quality, it would not be possible to make a preservation SSI in relation to these provisions as they confer functions on the UK Secretary of State – and not Scottish Ministers”.

I am really concerned about this, because we are reaching a cliff edge on 31 October. The secretary of state could retain important EU laws that protect human health and our environment, yet it looks like those laws will not be retained. The UK Government and, indeed, the Scottish Government have the opportunity to work together on a replacement framework that would help protect human health and the environment, but there is no sign of that, so those important laws will go. It is not just parliamentarians who are raising those concerns—Environmental Standards Scotland and non-governmental organisations have raised them, too.

I am really concerned about that cliff edge. As we know, air pollution does not respect boundaries; it crosses them. Having a UK framework is important, as it is across Europe. Notwithstanding the fact that the committee has written to the UK and Scottish Governments, I am really concerned that this law looks like it is set to go on 31 October. We have, at this point, no understanding about what will be brought in to protect our human health and environment in the interim, however long that might be.

We are due to see a refreshed rail decarbonisation plan quite soon. What changes might we expect to come through that? Are we still on track to deliver a decarbonised national rail service by the mid-2030s?

So, is the way in which those in customer-facing roles can be deployed part of on-going discussions with rail unions?

In response to the convener, you clarified earlier your role in relation to peatland restoration, which is a shared priority across Government, with various ministers feeding in. Why has peatland restoration been so difficult to achieve at the scale at which we need to achieve it if we are to tackle the climate emergency? What is the problem, and what can be done to increase the rate of restoration?

Is there a role for private sector natural capital investment in peatlands? Obviously, its focus so far has been on woodlands, but what about peatlands?

Thanks.

Minister, my first question is about the pilot project to remove peak rail fares, and the preparedness for that. Have any challenges in that regard been identified up front by ScotRail or Transport Scotland? If so, how are they being addressed as we move towards 2 October?