³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

With regard to the common frameworks, I know that there are six areas that relate to the committee’s remit. Those frameworks should be published at some point towards the end of the month, and it will then be up to the committee to scrutinise them.

I am sorry, but I have forgotten the last part of your question.

I do not agree with that assertion at all. I hope that I have been able to explain in my previous responses to you, and in my responses to some of Jim Fairlie’s questions, why we have set out what we have in the budget. There is no point in us allocating money, or looking to protect moneys, in the budget that we know for a fact that we will not be able to spend because of some of the issues that I have outlined, whether in relation to financial transactions or the capital schemes for funding equipment. There is no doubt that, if we did that, and there were huge underspends in budgets and areas that we had not been able to progress as a result, you would be criticising me in my future appearances at committee.

I have set out the realistic level of spend that we can hope to achieve over the coming financial year, while firmly setting us on the path for transformation. Again, I come back to the work of the implementation board in ensuring that we co-develop the approach with our stakeholders and with industry. That is where the national test programme comes in. That work, as it progresses from spring onwards, will be vital, because we need to take the whole industry with us. I hope that some of the measures that we have set out in that regard will enable that to happen.

You are absolutely right that housing is critical. I hear about it a lot; it is continually raised with me. When I responded to Beatrice Wishart, I spoke about how the islands bonds cannot be seen as a blunt instrument that will automatically solve all the problems that are experienced on the islands, because there are so many other vital issues, including housing and wider connectivity.

I have regular engagement through the islands strategic group, which discusses such issues. I also have regular engagement with colleagues across the Government. For example, Shona Robison, the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Housing and Local Government, attended our latest strategic meeting to discuss the Government’s plans for housing. Although the spend in that area does not necessarily fall within my portfolio, an action plan for rural and island housing is being developed and it will look to tackle and address some of the critical problems. The issue is raised repeatedly and we are committed to tackling it.

I was going to say that the funding that Marine Scotland has received has been appropriately spent. Again, however, I note that a lot has changed, even just over the past year. We declared a climate emergency and a biodiversity emergency, and we face similar challenges in the marine environment to the challenges that we face on land. As I outlined, the extra £10 million in resource will really help Marine Scotland to face up to some of those challenges, as well as in the drive for offshore renewables, which I mentioned earlier. We need to ensure that we enable that work, which is currently at the planning and consenting stage, to be done, and that we have in place the resources to scale it up.

We also had the Bute house agreement with the Scottish Green Party, which led us to look at our priorities, reprioritise some areas and put in place some ambitious commitments. That is why the extra investment in Marine Scotland is so important.

We have tried to ensure that the marine fund and any funds that we have align with the priorities that we have set out. We set out priorities in our future fisheries management strategy, but—again—a lot has changed over the past year. That was the first year of the marine fund Scotland, so we are seeking to evaluate the programme and look at what was achieved as a result of the funding that was spent. We want to ensure that, when we develop the strategies for these funds, they meet the ambitious priorities and commitments that we, as a Government, have set out and that they seek to achieve those goals.

If the committee would appreciate further information on the projects that have been awarded funding so far through the marine fund Scotland, and on the criteria that have been used, I would be happy to send that on.

You are absolutely right. The review will enable that to happen because it will provide the necessary resources to deal with the backlog, which should then enable the commission to look at some of the other issues that you have talked about, such as tackling derelict crofts, attracting more new entrants and implementing the crofting development plan.

We will continue to monitor the matter closely. I have regular engagement with the convener and the chief executive of the Crofting Commission to discuss on-going issues, look at the improvement plan and ensure that improvements are being made. The extra resource is so important because it will enable that work to take place.

I completely understand the points that you have raised. When I was in Shetland in the summer, I heard directly about the increased construction costs and various other issues that people face. The islands bond has never been seen as a blunt tool that will fix all those problems. I have been asked questions in the chamber about the islands bond, and it is just one strand of work that we are looking at to try and stem depopulation and support our populations in fragile communities. Many areas are involved in ensuring that we tackle the other issues that can lead to depopulation. The islands bond is one element that we feel can help to retain populations in fragile areas and repopulate depopulated areas.

As we have developed the bond, I have been keen to make sure that we undertake as much engagement as we possibly can so that, if we implement the measure, we do it right and in a way that will work. There have been a lot of misconceptions about what the bond will do and what it will look like, but that is why engagement is so important. Officials have undertaken extensive engagement so far, and that will continue. That has led us to propose the funding that we have in the budget this year. When you break it down, it looks like it may help only a specific number of households, but it is based on the engagement that we have had, and we are reflecting on the feedback that we have received. As you can imagine, there have been lots of different opinions on what it might look like and the different ways in which it might work.

It is really important that we listen, and that is exactly what we have tried to do. The funding will allow us to test some of the different approaches to the delivery of the island bond at a scale that will enable us to measure and understand the challenges and opportunities that are associated with the policy. The learning from that will allow us to develop a more effective and meaningful intervention for future years.

The commitment still remains with the funding for the islands bond, but the policy is being developed in that way purely based on the listening and learning that we have done along the way. That engagement will continue.

I will have to ask Caro Cowan for the specific information on that.

The extra investment that we have made for Marine Scotland has been vital because, since the UK left the EU, nearly 500 new obligations that relate to the marine environment, which were previously undertaken by the European Commission or by member states, have been transferred to the Scottish ministers; there are also 86 new powers. That means that we need to have more resource and to focus resource on managing all of that.

We also have ambitious targets when it comes to what we want to achieve in the marine environment. In the Bute house agreement with the Scottish Green Party, we have committed to establishing highly protected marine areas and to implementing management measures for our marine protected areas and our priority marine features. Given all the commitments that we have made on enhancing conservation and our marine environment, it is vital that we have the resource to put into supporting that work.

In an earlier response, I touched on the work that needs to be done on offshore renewables. Again, it is vital that we have in place the resource to enable us to support and deliver on all the commitments that we have set out and the transition that we need to make in some of those areas. That is what that £10 million will enable Marine Scotland to do.

Our initial commitment was to progress with three islands as part of the carbon-neutral islands project, but we have now extended that to six. We have developed internal and external working groups to consider the criteria that will inform the selection of islands that will be part of the project, and we are working across Government with existing policy and funding approaches to ensure that we are not duplicating work in other areas.

We have recently commissioned a mapping exercise, which will contribute to the knowledge of carbon accounting and emissions reductions on islands, ensuring that we avoid duplication when we begin the implementation phase of the project.

We aim to publish a report by summer this year, setting out the steps that we will take to support the six islands to move towards carbon neutrality. The £3 million that we have identified as part of the budget will support the implementation of that over the course of the coming financial year. As with the islands bonds, we want to engage and consult as we progress with the plans, because that will be critical as we proceed.