Chamber and committees

You said that it might not be “a bad thing”. The point was made earlier that businesses are gearing up to deliver. My concern is that, surely, if they are aiming at different targets on different parts of the range, there will never be consistent output.

If business has to meet different targets in Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland and England, that makes for a complicated playing field.

Bob Doris wants to come in on a point about legislation.

I am sure that the cabinet secretary will be asked that question in the next evidence session.

Before you start, I will just say that a couple of other members want to come in. I am happy to keep the cabinet secretary waiting, but I cannot stop my members getting questions, as that will have repercussions for me, so short answers would be very helpful.

Good morning, and welcome to the 26th meeting in 2024 of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee.

The first agenda item is a declaration of interests. I welcome our new committee member, Michael Matheson, who replaces Ben Macpherson. I am sure that everyone would like me to put on record our thanks to Ben for all the work that he put into the committee. When I say that he was extremely diligent in all that he did, I do not mean that in a patronising way, because he was painstaking in what he did, and we had a very constructive relationship. He will retain a link with the committee, because he is a substitute member, so I am sure that we will see him again, and I look forward to that. We are all pleased that that is the case.

I invite Michael Matheson to declare any relevant interests.

Okay. Thank you.

Welcome back. Item 5 on our agenda is the second day of evidence on the Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill. The bill seeks to amend the current approach to setting interim greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.

We will hear from two panels of witnesses today. I am delighted to welcome Dr Alina Averchenkova, distinguished policy fellow, and Catherine Higham, policy fellow, both from the Grantham research institute on climate change and the environment; Dr Thomas Muinzer, reader in energy transition law at the University of Aberdeen; Mike Robinson of Stop Climate Chaos Scotland; and Neil Langhorn, head of strategy and analysis at Environmental Standards Scotland.

Thank you for coming here at short notice. I apologise to those witnesses in the room and online for keeping you waiting. I am afraid that we are struggling with the timetabling of the bill. It is sometimes just a question of getting the formalities right.

We have a load of questions so not all of you will get the chance to answer each one, but if you want to answer, try to catch my eye or wave your hand, and whoever is asking the question will try to bring you in.

I have a gentle question to start with. The Climate Change Committee has proposed carbon budgeting as the most suitable system for setting emission reductions. What are the disadvantages or the downsides of that compared with the current system?

I do not know who wants to head off first. Dr Averchenkova, you are first on my list, so I will come to you first. You did not look away quickly enough if you did not want to answer, but please have a go at the question.

Thank you. Neil Langhorn, do you want to add anything to that?

Mike Robinson, you are the last person who I will call to come in. Should there be mandatory reporting at certain stages during the five-year budget cycle, or should it all be left to the last moment before an election? What do you think?

Okay. Thank you for that. I did not come to you, Catherine Higham, but I am sure that you will get called in the next lot of questions, which will come from Monica Lennon.