���˿���

I make it clear that I was not picking out one individual. I would just note that in the two key messages in its report, Audit Scotland says:

“The lack of frequent and consistent reporting, alongside gaps in performance monitoring, make it difficult to gain assurance of overall progress.”

It also highlights the lack of a workforce plan and points out that

“Systematic risk management is needed so the Scottish Government can identify the key risks to meeting its climate change goals and take effective action to address them.”

Given what happened last week, people might think that that factor contributed to the situation. Just to give a more balanced view, though, I should say that Audit Scotland told the committee fairly recently that it is happier now.

However, do we need to look back at that period? Is a lesson that we need to learn that we must ensure that local government, other public bodies and everyone else gets their house in order, so that we can have the proper governance that we need?

Thank you. I will hand back to the convener, for the purposes of time.

I do not want to lower the mood, as you were trying to take us to quite a positive place—you will be missed in your role. You opened the evidence session by describing the dangerous moment in which we find ourselves. Last week, we heard reactions from charities and veteran climate campaigners about scrapping the 2030 climate targets. We heard from Oxfam that it is a “global embarrassment.” We heard from Friends of the Earth Scotland that it was

“the worst environmental decision in the history of the Scottish Parliament”.

People who know the climate science, the importance of getting things right, the opportunities and the prize that awaits us are not taking it well, and they are certainly not exaggerating.

You have spoken about a climate act that is in danger of being an empty vessel. There are blank pages where we should have good, bold policies. The Scottish Government has had 15 years to deliver transformative action. How do we get things back on track if it looks like there has been a real lack of political courage? There will be a lot of debate and discussion during the rest of the parliamentary session, there is a motion of no confidence and the Bute house agreement is in jeopardy. How do politicians find the courage here? What advice can you give to Government and Parliament?

You made an important comment about the fact that net zero should not be siloed. With regard to the Scottish Government, has that been part of the problem?

Hi, everyone; it is nice to see you again. I am an MSP for the Central Scotland region and a member of the committee. I live in Blantyre in South Lanarkshire.

Thank you again, everyone, for your brilliant ideas, and to the 23 members of the climate change people’s panel. I have scribbled down lots of notes, but I will stick to some of the questions that I had planned. One was to come back to the issue of finance and financial support. The panel has called on the Scottish Government to increase financial support to enable people to take action that will help the Government and Scotland to meet our really important climate targets. That includes free bus travel, which has been talked about already.

I am interested to hear what evidence the people’s panel heard about the need for more financial support to help individual people. Karen Shakespeare talked about how a lot of the measures that are discussed are not affordable for everyone, which I think that we all recognise. I am interested to hear more about the evidence and what kind of financial support you think would be useful.

Thank you, Kevin. You make some really important points.

Buses have been mentioned, and one of your recommendations is free bus travel. To make bus travel free for everyone would require a lot of investment and there would be a cost to the public purse. Did you hear evidence on how such a policy would work? Might it achieve savings elsewhere or in the longer term? Did you hear any evidence about how it could be funded—what would work and what would not?

So, we need to build on that best practice and mainstream that work.

I see that David Harrold also has his hand up.

Rather than give a direct answer, I thought that it might be better to build on the important points that Scott Cruickshank has made. There is the issue of financial investment, whether it is heat pumps or something else, but for individual householders, there could be an element of risk, not just about the money but about how we know that we can trust the tradespeople who come into our home and that the work can be properly certified. As well as addressing the issue of financial support, perhaps people can add to that. I hope that the Government is listening and can help us as a committee to answer Scott Cruickshank’s question more directly.

In terms of the financial support, was it mostly about helping individuals or was it also about doing things at a neighbourhood level? I think that you did some work on district heating schemes.

I will ask about buses in a moment, but given what Louise has just described, it sounds as if there might have been an argument in your discussions that a bit more co-ordination would help. Individual households might feel that doing this would be quite a big leap of faith, but if they were working alongside their neighbours or others in the community, that pooling of resources might help. Before we go on to talk about buses, does anyone have a final comment on that point?