���˿���

Yes.

That is a major part of the engagement that I have been having with the new UK Government. Ever since I took up the post of energy minister, I have been clear that community benefits should be mandatory. The previous Conservative Government did not agree with me. I also believe that there should be mandatory community engagement, but the previous Government did not agree with me on that, either. Now, I am in a situation in which I am dealing with a new UK Government and I think that my asks are having an impact.

Last year, we conducted a joint consultation on the issue that you raise. However, the Scottish Government is not waiting for the outcome of that consultation; we are already working on revising our guidance for community engagement as part of our own programme. I would expect that developers would sign up to that on a voluntary basis, but I hope that the UK Government will use its powers over guidance to make community engagement and community benefit mandatory. The previous Government was not interested in that.

I shared the concerns about using ScotWind revenue. ScotWind should have a legacy benefit for Scotland. We have reduced our initial assumed usage of ScotWind revenue, which was mentioned by Ms Lennon, from £424 million to £160 million, and we are working to reduce that fully by the end of this financial year. We are now in a position to invest ScotWind revenues in a wide range of projects that will provide long-term benefits for Scotland—not least in my portfolio—to deliver our ambitions to tackle climate change and invest in growing the economy. We talked about that in relation to the offshore wind money, which I have discussed with your colleagues.

Our capital package is supported by more than £326 million of ScotWind funding, but money is also going to other portfolios from ScotWind. We have £500 million to anchor our supply chain, and we have responded to the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities’ ask for funding to respond to the climate emergency by making £40 million available to target local priorities. Another legacy project involves funding of £20 million going to the Orkney and Shetland Councils for interisland connectivity. ScotWind money has not just been used in my portfolio: it is also being used in other portfolios and will have a legacy effect for Scotland and will benefit people.

We also have £16 million for progressing reform of the agriculture and food and drink industries. We are now able to release ScotWind money in ways that will help us to reduce our emissions and ways that will be part of the just transition and of improvement to services and infrastructure. I hope that that has answered Ms Lennon’s question.

There is an awful lot more demand for offshore wind support than there is for green hydrogen support, but that will potentially be ramping up. One of the reasons why green hydrogen will be so important is that we will be generating far more green electricity. Even now, we are generating more green electricity than we can get on to the grid. Even with grid infrastructure upgrades to get green electricity on to the grid—I know that Mr Lumsden has an issue with that—we will still have a surplus of green energy, which is why there will be so many opportunities for green hydrogen.

The innovation work is being done right now, and support for companies that are scaling up is being provided right now. However, the priority is to get INTOG and ScotWind developments under way so that the feedstock of green electricity can be generated.

No.

I have probably rehearsed this quite often: there will be no request from the partners in the Scottish cluster or the Acorn project for any of that £80 million until they get track status. They said that to me in the first meeting that I had with them. I think that it was within the first week after I became energy minister that I had a round table with the Scottish cluster partners. They said to me, “We will need that money at the point at which we get track status.”

How many years have we been waiting for that track status? If there is a silver bullet for carbon capture and storage in Scotland, it is track status. I, along with many others, made that point to the Conservative Government and I have made it to the current Labour Government. We have a massive opportunity. The pledge of £80 million will be there and ready, and we will be directed by the Scottish cluster and the Acorn project about how it would be best spent in order to get that project off the ground.

We discussed that last week, with regard to Great British Energy. We talked about wave and tidal needing that support to get to commerciality and to prove that the technology is there. The draft budget provides £2.3 million to Wave Energy Scotland in the final year of its 2021 to 2025 business plan. That funding will support it to achieve its programme of objectives, including the further testing of wave energy systems in real sea conditions. That will support the sector’s journey to commercialisation.

The cluster is ready.

It is additional funding. Sorry, can I just check—is the £5 million core funding for the climate action hubs?

Yes. It has told us that it is appropriately resourced.

At the tail end of last year, the CCC was working on its advice to the UK Government and, as soon as it had finished that particular tranche of advice, it was going to move on to work on the advice to us. I discussed the issue with Emma Pinchbeck in December, but she already knew about it, because she had keenly followed the Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill’s consideration by this committee and by the Parliament. The CCC heard our calls and the committee’s calls for the timely provision of advice, and it is now in a position to say that it will provide its advice in about the third week in May.