Chamber and committees

Why is that not clearer? I refer to the Auditor General’s report.

I have some specific questions, but I would like to ask a more general question to begin. A lot of the work that the Scottish Government has done with regard to climate change is fairly well developed. A huge amount is being done on that side of the balance sheet. The other side is how you are going to afford this. Where is the money coming from? In another committee meeting, one of the witnesses referred to a wall of private finance, because clearly the Government does not have all the money that is needed to effect that. That wall of private finance must be tapped into. It must be shown that there are viable projects that will give a good return on investment. How are we tapping into that and communicating with that wall? Are we doing it through the United Kingdom Government or directly? How are we going to be competitive, particularly against the rest of the developed world, which will be looking for that same money?

Was there any logic behind not producing minutes and meeting informally?

Informally.

Let us move on to another governance issue. The Auditor General made multiple references to gaps in climate governance linked to adaptation in his report and in his evidence to the committee on 18 May. What progress is the Scottish Government making on addressing gaps in governance and capacity linked to climate adaptation, ahead of producing the next climate adaptation programme?

Is the Auditor General incorrect that the deputy director network is responsible for delivering on policies within the climate change plan update? Did it never have that responsibility?

I have seen various figures for the money that will be needed to fund the transition, and all of them are eye watering. What seems to have been done so far is relatively small, compared to those figures. We will have to tap into huge sums of money—billions and billions—over a period. There will be competition for that money from everywhere.

How well developed are our links to private finance so that we ensure that Scotland receives its fair share of funding and can produce enough viable projects? Some projects are not necessarily profitable but nevertheless need to be done, which would imply public funding as opposed to private funding. How is that all being brought together? Is a group working on that by maintaining and developing relationships and contacts, and ensuring that there is a pipeline?

I am sure that some of my colleagues will also have questions on that.

Let me move on to a more specific question. The Auditor General’s report describes the deputy director network as

“a key climate change governance body”

and states that it has responsibilities for delivering on the policies within the climate change plan update. However, it operates informally; there are no minutes of meetings. Is there a reason why there are no minutes of meetings? How are decisions taken, recorded and communicated?

What is in people’s heads in deciding to produce no minutes? There are no minutes for a key board.

So it is correct.