Chamber and committees

I am interested in divergence in the field of climate and environment. You have produced an incredibly interesting report, in which I note that you say that, in theory, Brexit could make it easier to enact policies for reaching net zero. I realise that we are at an early stage of the process, but can you indicate what the early evidence is suggesting on the UK’s approach to divergence from that of the EU with regard to target setting and mandatory commitments to help to tackle climate change?

As you have highlighted, there are almost two phases to this. The first phase is establishing what provision is out there and understanding where gaps might be. The second phase is attempting to ensure that, throughout Scotland, the provision is as consistent as we can possibly make it. What intervention would you like to see from the Scottish Government or Creative Scotland to allow both of those phases to be enacted?

I will start with a question for Robbie McGhee. The written evidence that you provided around the mapping of arts in health provision was very interesting. I am particularly interested in the suggestion that the provision is clustered around Glasgow, Edinburgh and the central belt. What are your thoughts on how that provision could be expanded beyond the central belt or whether there is activity going on that has perhaps not been included in the mapping exercise?

Thank you. That was very interesting.

Diana Murray, what are your thoughts on how we improve our understanding and mapping of the provision, as well as enhancing it?

That is very interesting. I think that some of your analogies can also be applied up here in Scotland with respect to climate change narrative versus delivery.

I want to ask you specifically about the UK’s nationally determined contribution, which is highlighted as being a 68 per cent reduction in carbon emissions by 2030. The EU’s target is 55 per cent. In the impact assessment, there is an indication that although being part of the EU would not have stopped the UK putting in that more stringent target, it would not have been able to present it in the same manner, if you like. Could you perhaps expand on that? I note that there are a number of examples of other areas where the UK is striding ahead to tackle climate change, such as on oil and gas boilers, more sustainable agriculture and petrol and diesel cars, and I am very keen to hear comments on that.

We will start with Professor Menon this time.

I think that you are quite right to highlight that setting ambitious targets is very much the easy part of tackling climate change and that it is on delivery that things come home to roost, as we are seeing.

Not at all—that was very interesting.

I have a quick supplementary question. You mentioned key target territories for recruitment. Do you have a broad idea of where those might be?

We received a written submission from Oxfam, which states:

“Scotland’s credibility on climate justice is now in significant jeopardy due to it missing three successive annual emissions targets.”

I realise that delivery of climate targets is not in your portfolio directly, but is that situation having an impact on Scotland’s international effort?

We have heard lots of evidence about the positive nature of the Scottish Government’s international work. I listened to your answer to my earlier question. Have you considered taking a thematic approach to complement the geographic approach that we are currently pursuing, in order to get more bang for our buck? That might involve looking at renewables or water. That is just a thought.