���˿���

If I recall correctly, the challenge around that is that we had intended to respond to the committee’s report with our work on developing a new marine plan. That work was paused and delayed, which meant that we were not able to provide a full response. I am more than happy to ensure that we look at providing that response as part of our work to develop the new marine plan.

The details of the bill are still to be published and I do not want to pre-empt what must be agreed through Government and published. However, grouse management is a key aspect of the bill, as is how to balance it with biodiversity challenges. I hope that it will help to provide a more modern framework for grouse management and how that balances with the need to tackle biodiversity loss.

Part of the reform of the grant scheme is about that. It is about trying to help to make it more of an attractive proposition, particularly for farmers who might be considering the possibility of using existing farmland for forestry purposes.

This is an important issue. Obviously, finance is important, but having the right skills and the right people is also extremely important in being able to deliver on your net zero objectives at a local authority level. We have tried to address the issue through a variety of means and the Sustainable Scotland Network is one practical route by which we try to help to achieve that. It is about pooling and joining together expertise and experience within the public sector so that we can cascade it out to the whole of the sector and those who participate in it.

There are also some funding streams available to local authorities that can help them to do some of the pre-capital stages of plans that they are looking at. They can get funding to help to resource additional capacity to carry out some of the modelling, design and planning around net zero to support them in achieving that as well.

There is a bigger issue that we probably have to do more on. It is not necessarily about additional staff, but the skills base of the current staff, who must be upskilled. You will be well aware of the “Climate Emergency Skills Action Plan 2020-2025”, which is all about helping to develop the skills that are needed to tackle the climate emergency. Most of that plan is targeted at those who are already within the private sector to some extent, and I think that there is a need for us to look at whether there is more to do in helping to support those in our public sector.

I cannot say to you that we have a specific way in which we will do that, but I think that it is one of the issues that is becoming an increasingly important aspect. We need to work with COSLA to look at how we can address what it views as potentially a skills gap in its own staff, to help to upskill them in developing plans and proposals around net zero. I am certainly happy to take that away and look at how we can help to develop that further.

You will need to wait to see what is in the draft bill. I will not pre-empt it. We also need to make sure that when we provide any additional powers, particularly regulatory powers like this, to third-party bodies that we are satisfied that there is the appropriate regulatory function for managing that. For example, powers that are exercised by the police have a stringent range of challenges around them if they are seen to be inappropriately used and so on, in a way that the SSPCA’s powers may not have.

I hope that once you have seen the bill, you will be in a position where you can determine whether the powers that we provide are sufficient or not. We also need to be mindful of the regulatory aspect of providing any additional powers to a third-party body.

Yes. I will ask David Pratt to come in. He will give you a bit more detail on how we will take that forward.

Six public events took place over the course of August. Five of them were in person and one was virtual. I do not know the exact details of the number of responses that we have had, but we received representation looking to extend the consultation period for an additional amount of time to allow other stakeholders to engage in that process, which is why we agreed to an extension of the timeframe.

I am more than happy to ask officials to provide an update on the quantity of feedback that we have received so far and pass that on to the committee, if that would be useful.

No. The extension will not have any impact on the timeframe. It will allow stakeholders a bit more time to make their submissions and representations, but it will not have any material impact on the planned timeline for the legislation.

Nature-based solutions are important and sit alongside aspects such as tackling the biodiversity crisis that we face. Some local authorities will be better provided for in terms of natural assets than others, purely due to geography. How can we make better use of those assets? How do we make them investable propositions? We are already doing work around peatland restoration, additional woodlands and so on. Is there a way in which we can work with local authorities to make better use of existing spaces that are not necessarily playing a role within nature-based solutions? Yes. Some of that is already happening. In my constituency, I can think of work that is being taken forward in the Hallglen area redeveloping an old colliery bing that has now been turned into a nature park to help to support biodiversity and has brought together a whole range of different stakeholders. Some of that work is already happening. Could we do more of it? Yes, I would like to see more of that happening. A big part of that is also local neighbourhoods and communities: how do we make better use of our community assets within a neighbourhood to support nature-based solutions? There is certainly more that we could do in that area.

On an investable proposition, we are taking forward work and looking at how we can make sure that we have what would be viewed as a clear set of principles around any private sector investment in nature-based solutions as an option that some local authorities and others might want to access. We need to do it in a way that is consistent with it being of a high standard and having a clear set of principles before we start opening it up widely to private sector investment.

The review of NPF4 has taken place and an updated NPF4 will be published in the next couple of months. I hope that that will deliver the tools that they believe are necessary to help to support them in delivering nature-based solutions and protecting the nature-based provisions they have in their local area. If local authorities feel that there are particular gaps in the existing planning regulations, I have no doubt that we would be more than willing to look at that, but I certainly want to make sure that local authorities have the necessary powers required to protect nature-based environments in their own local authority areas and also to act to develop areas in their own local authority areas. If there is a particular area that you feel is a gap, I am more than happy for us to take that away and for the planning minister to look at it as part of the NPF4 process. I hope that that is an issue that was flagged up during the review of NPF4—I have no doubt that it was.