���˿���

Absolutely.

One of the key arguments for not seeing resilience as a nice add-on at the end of the process is that it might do away with the need to address some of the other issues that we have been talking about. Having islands or rural communities that are self-sufficient in energy terms means that we do not need to worry about some of the broader issues around transmission and distribution, because it is all right there. I am not necessarily seeing that kind of strategic thinking about off-grid—that might be the wrong phrase; perhaps I should say “beyond-grid”—supply, distribution, transmission and use.

I am not trying to be awkward. Others round the table might think that I am—it is just my nature.

One of the key challenges about which we have talked, about which the committee has heard and about which we hear often is problems with the resilience of grid connections. You will be familiar with some of the resilience issues and failures during storm Arwen and other similar events. What are the opportunities in the body of work that we are talking about, whether legislation or reviews, to think outside the box—or beyond the grid—so that we can have local, community-owned, resilient energy supplies that are not dependent on infrastructure that might be several tens of miles away or controlled several hundreds of miles away? How do we build resilience into an energy system—in particular, the electricity system—that is not only net zero but fit for the future and is not subject to grid failures?

I appreciate that it is early days.

Beyond grid.

I know that other members want to come in with more worker-focused questions.

I appreciate that, and I appreciate that this is the start of the process for the plan.

Linked to that, I want to get a sense of how you see some of the connections with the bits of life that are beyond the industrial sectors of the cluster—for example, schooling and transport. You mentioned people coming in from Stirling, Edinburgh, Glasgow and all around. In the just transition plan for Grangemouth, we need to crack the problem of what grew out of the energy sector in the north-east, with which I am much more familiar. There, we got a two-tier economy, whereby those who were involved directly in the energy sector did extremely well, while the rest of the community—people in Torry, for instance, to the south of Aberdeen—were pretty much left behind.

In this inquiry, we have already heard a bit about people’s experiences in that regard. People who have nothing to do with the energy cluster, but who live in and around Grangemouth, cannot be left behind. I am curious about how you see engagement with communities, and with workers in other sectors that have nothing to do with the energy cluster, working through the plan.

Good morning, and thank you for joining us.

I was going to bring up our place-based town centre inquiry, because I think that there is something about seeing a place as a whole and as more than just somewhere where all the various sectors come together. Therefore, I do not underestimate the challenge that Catriona Laing has just talked about with regard to bringing the sectoral plans into sharp relief.

I want to follow up on some of the points that Fiona Hyslop made about community engagement and co-design work. I appreciate what has been said on co-design and engagement with the just transition commission, but communities and workers should be included in that co-design process in a meaningful way that does not just channel those views through the just transition commission, where people might think that they would get a little lost. I urge the Scottish Government to think about co-leadership and co-ownership of different elements of the plans and of our delivery and implementation approaches.

That is particularly important for the long term, cabinet secretary. You said very clearly that you are not thinking in short-term chunks of time. If the community and the workers own the process, they will be invested in it and will make it work for 2045. Rather than just involving them in the process, we should give them ownership of that process. That represents a different approach. It is scary, because the Government does not do that often or regularly, but it is really important that that happens.

From that, we will get questions about not only transport and housing, which Fiona Hyslop has highlighted, but the other infrastructure needs of the local area, such as the flood prevention plan and other environmental infrastructure needs. How will the plan be able to take account of those issues that do not relate directly to the energy issues or the chemical industries of Grangemouth, but which relate to the community more broadly?

Graham O’Neill talked about institutional accommodation. People would like to believe that hotel use is not institutionalised, but it is clear that there is, and has been for some time, institutionalised accommodation, particularly in some parts of Scotland. With hotel use becoming more widespread and hotels across the country being used?not necessarily with the right support services, as Annika Joy said?have you any confidence that the private contractors who run the hotels find out what support is available from, for example, third sector organisations? When hotels are selected, is there any community discussion about what might happen when however many asylum seekers are accommodated? What communication takes place between the local community and private contractors?

Good morning. I thank the witnesses for being here and for laying out so starkly what a bleak picture we have at the moment—never mind how much worse it will be with the Illegal Migration Bill.

Graham O’Neill identified two points that are worth remembering: one about following the money and one about the hostile environment, which is that we are going on a journey along an ideological trajectory that started some years ago with that hostile environment.

I am interested in exploring the current practice, particularly around hotel accommodation. You have all talked about it in slightly different ways. Phil Arnold, can you outline why so many asylum seekers are currently being accommodated in hotels? We have heard about some of the issues in that regard, such as the failure to integrate and the almost ghettoisation of asylum seekers. Can you tell us a little bit about the hotels and how they support asylum seekers?