Chamber and committees

I would be grateful if you would come back to me on that, minister. It seems to have been as much of a surprise to you as it was to me.

Does Robert Samson or Michael Clark have anything to add to that?

I strongly agree.

Robert Samson, you said clearly that electrification should be achievable by 2035. The rail decarbonisation plan to 2035 is not costed. Despite having been published in July 2020, it says that

“that analysis has yet to be undertaken”.

Has enough work been done to assess what must be done to achieve electrification, such as dealing with bridges or lowering track where necessary? Given that the document was published in July 2020, is there any evidence that the lack of costing is being addressed or planned for?

Natalie Don and Monica Lennon rightly asked about food production. The assembly made a recommendation about ending industrial fishing. I refer to the question about aviation and will ask the same one about fishing. What did the assembly conclude about the just transition aspects of ending industrial fishing for those who are employed in that sector? What did it conclude would be the impact, both on food supply and price—giving particular consideration to those who have less to spend on food—of ending that?

I ask the panel to follow up on what I thought was a very good question from Jackie Dunbar. I will press you for a little more detail on that, please. I hear the proposals, but what did the assembly conclude would be the practical impact of proposals such as a frequent flyer levy or increasing ADT on jobs, on the ability of the lower-paid to fly and on connectivity for places such as the Highlands and Islands and—somewhere that Jackie and I are very concerned about—the north-east of Scotland? What did the assembly conclude would be the practical impacts of those policies?

Before we end, I have one further question. The Climate Assembly wants Government to create a scorecard with KPIs, which I think is a positive idea with regard to the measurement of what is going on. However, in that case, why does the Climate Assembly think that the reporting duties under things such as the fourth national planning framework—NPF4—and similar schemes are not adequate and will not deliver the measurement that we want?

As I made clear in my question, however, Transport Scotland would like ministerial direction.

I wonder whether you can help me with something that I genuinely do not understand. I believe that businesses already pay tax on parking spaces through the business rates scheme. Has the Government taken advice on whether it is legally competent to double tax the same piece of property under two separate taxes?

I will just fire a number of very quick questions at you, minister, if I may. First, what, according to the modelling, is the minimum charge that will drive the behaviour change to use of public transport that you want?

Thank you for that full answer, minister, but I am just looking for a figure. What is the minimum charge that will drive the behaviour change? If that is in the letter, perhaps you can point it out to me.

Secondly, in its final business and regulatory impact assessment, Transport Scotland has said that the Scottish Government will need to produce guidance and regulations to ensure “national consistency” and success in the scheme. Has that guidance been produced?