Chamber and committees

The level has remained stubbornly high and, over five years, it has not reduced. That means the status quo to me.

You are saying that you are content to let mortalities increase by 35 per cent. The industry will say that it is producing more fish and that therefore accounts for more mortalities. However, compounding an error surely is not the way forward. I do not understand any industry that would accept a 25 per cent mortality rate. I understand that, with farming, there is a certain amount of mortality, but are you really happy with 25 per cent? Do you think that that is good for the environment around our coastlines or good for the industry?

I am concerned that a 168 per cent increase suggests that there are problems with fish health and that we are just using more antibiotics to cover it up, which could be to the detriment of our need for antibiotics.

Okay. Thank you. The next set of questions will come from Fiona Hyslop.

I will bring in the deputy convener.

Under our second agenda item, we will consider a draft Scottish statutory instrument: the Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009 (Interim Target) Amendment Regulations 2023. I am pleased to welcome Màiri McAllan, the Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Just Transition, and, from the Scottish Government, Norman Munro, a solicitor, and Philip Raines, deputy director for domestic climate change. Thank you for joining us.

The instrument was laid under the affirmative procedure, which means that the Parliament must approve it before it comes into force. Following the evidence session, the committee will be invited, under the next agenda item, to consider a motion to approve the instrument. I remind everyone that officials can speak under this item, but not in the debate that follows.

I believe that the cabinet secretary wants to make a brief opening statement.

I see that committee members do not wish to make any further contributions.

Cabinet secretary, you are technically allowed to sum up. I am not sure that there is much more to say, but I am happy for you to do so if you want to.

Our next item of business is an evidence-taking session as part of our inquiry into Scotland’s electricity infrastructure: inhibitor or enabler of our energy ambitions.

Today, we will conclude the inquiry by hearing from the Scottish Government to understand its vision for our electricity infrastructure as set out in the draft energy strategy. We will also explore other themes that have emerged during our inquiry.

I am pleased to welcome Neil Gray, Cabinet Secretary for Wellbeing Economy, Fair Work and Energy—thank you for accepting our invitation and congratulations on your new role. I also welcome from the Scottish Government: Claire Jones, head of onshore electricity policy; and Ragne Low, deputy director, onshore electricity policy. Thank you for joining us today.

Before we begin, cabinet secretary, I believe that you wish to make a brief opening statement.

Thank you very much, cabinet secretary. Before we get any further into the meeting, I remind members—and any members of the audience who might be listening—that, as a farmer and landowner, I have electricity transmission lines in the form of 11kV lines and 33kV ring main lines crossing my farm, and I am in negotiations with regard to a 132kV line. All of those will generate some income at some stage for the farm. I want there to be no doubt that I have some interests in these power lines, and I will continue to make that declaration as and when I believe it appropriate. However, having made that declaration, I do not believe that it prevents me from doing my job as convener of this committee. I just wanted everyone to know that.

I am also delighted, cabinet secretary, to hear you make at the outset the comment that I was going to make at the end of this session that you will be using the report from this inquiry to inform your decisions. The committee does feel that the inquiry is very important for the future of energy in Scotland.

I come first to the deputy convener, who has some questions.

I think that Mark Ruskell has a follow-up question.