Chamber and committees

We can go to David Hawkey but, before we do, Douglas Lumsden wants to clarify a point with Emily Nurse.

Bob Doris will ask the next questions.

“Practicable”. The term is a get-out for a politician to use. What do you think would be a reasonable timecale—a year, two years or three years?

Okay.

Monica Lennon wants to come in, after which I will bring in Ben Macpherson.

It is important. The issue is the timing of the climate change plan in relation to the first carbon budget and how that could—without putting words into your mouth—run slightly differently for subsequent carbon budgets because there is a bit more time.

It would be good to see that in writing, so that we do not misquote you, because that would be a big mistake.

The next question comes from Douglas Lumsden.

The deputy convener has some questions.

Before I come to Graeme Roy, I will say that the danger is that we set a budget that puts us ahead of anyone else, which means that we have to use cutting-edge technology to achieve it. My experience of cutting-edge technology is that it costs more, because only a few are using it at the start, and it invariably breaks down more quickly, than proven technology. Are you happy that we are to go on a different cycle, given all the moving parts that you mentioned?

Will you clarify something for me? Section 3(2), which is about laying the next climate change plan, proposes that that should happen

“as soon as practicable after the first regulations setting a Scottish carbon budget come into force”.

“As soon as possible”—that is a wonderful term.