Clare Adamson
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“That concludes the debate. I wish members, their staff and everyone else who works on the parliamentary campus a wonderful recess. Meeting closed at 18:10. This is a draft Official Report and is subject to correction between publication and archiving, which will take place no later than 35 working days after the date of the meeting.”
“I am reminded again of my discussion with the family of the man on licence in the community. They reported that there is a broken community payback system and that hours have been wasted by a poorly managed scheme.”
“Home detention as part of a wider set of tools to manage a prison population does work, yet the number of prisoners on home detention curfew is lower now than it was 10 years ago. Between 2016 and 2018, an average of 288 prisoners were on home detention at any one time; during the same period ending in 2025, the average number was 87.”
“I call on the Scottish Government to do what Pauline McNeill described clearly and take the action that is needed to clear the backlog in the justice system. We need to reduce the number of people who are held on remand.”
“He committed an act of violence and punishment is appropriate, but we agree with the Scottish Government that to assume prison is a panacea for all crime is to simplify the most complex of issues. As my colleague from across the chamber emphasised today, the aim of our justice system is twofold: to punish and to rehabilitate.”
“We now move to closing speeches. I call Yi-pee—sorry, Yi-pei—Chou Turvey to speak for up to four minutes. 15:50 Yi-pei Chou Turvey: Do not worry, Deputy Presiding Officer—Yi and pei are both pronounced like EE, the phone company, if that makes it easier to remember.”
The complete record
Every one of 640 lines we hold for Clare Adamson, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 13.
“Published in Edinburgh by the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, the Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh, EH99 1SP All documents are available on the Scottish Parliament website at: www.parliament.scot Information on non-endorsed print suppliers is available here: www.parliament.scot/documents For information on the Scottish Parliament contact Public Information on: Telephone: 0131 348 5000 Textphone: 0800 092 7100 Email: sp.info@parliament.scot”
“That concludes the debate. I wish members, their staff and everyone else who works on the parliamentary campus a wonderful recess. Meeting closed at 18:10. This is a draft Official Report and is subject to correction between publication and archiving, which will take place no later than 35 working days after the date of the meeting. The most up-to-date version is available here: https://www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/official-report Members and other meeting participants who wish to suggest corrections to their contributions should contact the Official Report. Official Report Email: official.report@parliament.scot Room T2.20 Telephone: 0131 348 5447 Scottish Parliament Edinburgh EH99 1SP The deadline for corrections to this edition is 20 working days after the date of publication.”
“Our final item of business is a debate on motion S7M-00343, in the name of Marie McNair, on action mesothelioma day 2026. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. Motion debated, That the Parliament recognises Action Mesothelioma Day 2026, which will be marked on 3 July; understands that this is a national event held each year to raise awareness of mesothelioma and asbestos; notes that mesothelioma is a rare but aggressive form of cancer that is usually caused by exposure to asbestos, with tiny fibres getting into the lungs and damaging them over time; understands that over 2,700 people in the UK are diagnosed with the condition each year, including around 200 in Scotland; notes that the cancer most commonly occurs in the lining of the lung, but can also be found in the lining of both the abdomen and the heart, with symptoms including shortness of breath, chest pain, coughing and tiredness; recognises the importance of grass-roots activism to seek justice for victims, including the campaign, Cape Must Pay!, which calls for the former asbestos manufacturer Cape plc, which is now owned by Altrad, to donate £10 million to mesothelioma research; acknowledges with concern what it sees as the time bar injustice for mesothelioma victims and welcomes the Scottish Law Commission report, Report on Damages for Personal Injury; notes the calls for action to be taken to implement the report’s findings; welcomes the events taking place across the country and encourages everyone to “Go Blue for Meso” by joining or organising a Blue Light Walk to raise awareness or fundraise; applauds the longstanding and ongoing work of the Clydebank Asbestos Group, which has provided information and support to people with asbestos-related conditions for over 30 years, and hopes for a successful Action Mesothelioma Day 2026.”
“There is great interest in the statement. I request that members ask succinct questions and that the cabinet secretary gives succinct answers. Those who wish to ask a question should press their request-to-speak buttons.”
“The next item of business is a statement by Angela Constance on national health service capital projects. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of the statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions. 16:35”
“That concludes the debate on achieving a sustainable prison population. I will allow a few moments for members on the front benches to swap over before we move to the next item of business. National Health Service Capital Projects”
“Members. Stephen Kerr: Surely not, Deputy Presiding Officer. Here I am, trying to be a constructive participant in the debate, and what do I get? Members crying, “Tory, Tory, Tory.” We can have such debates if members like, because I am quite adept at participating in them— as, I think, the cabinet secretary would agree—but I am trying to be constructive. We must take a problem and understand its roots before we can begin to challenge it.”
“I call on the Government to work with us where our shared values align to create lasting benefits for the people of Scotland. The current crisis in our prison system is the consequence of years of being on the bottom of the to-do list, of the backlogs of the justice system, the delay to the prison infrastructure, the high remand population and of missing the fact that there is predictable pressure on the prison estate. It is like that unloved but necessary drawer of doom in your home that you always do last and only find time to sort when you cannot close it any more. Let us agree to that and move forward with purpose. 15:55”
“I am reminded again of my discussion with the family of the man on licence in the community. They reported that there is a broken community payback system and that hours have been wasted by a poorly managed scheme. For those reasons, the Scottish Liberal Democrats call on the Scottish Government to publish a long-term strategy for achieving a sustainable prison population that commands public confidence. Justice cannot be about one emergency after another. This problem is solvable and has not come as a surprise. I call on the Scottish Government to take the bold decisions needed to effect deliverable, actionable differences. It is what we were elected to do. Delivery, action and getting things done are what the Scottish Liberal Democrats are committed to deliver in the Parliament.”
“I call on the Scottish Government to do what Pauline McNeill described clearly and take the action that is needed to clear the backlog in the justice system. We need to reduce the number of people who are held on remand. As several colleagues from across the chamber have stated, offending often sits hand in hand with complex issues that the offenders face. We call on the Scottish Government to pour money into programming that works to treat the underlying issues, including by providing addiction support, services to improve mental health, and support with housing and for the families of offenders, which Kate Campbell, Maggie Chapman and Michelle Campbell mentioned. At the start of the debate, the cabinet secretary highlighted that community sentences need to be effective.”
“Home detention as part of a wider set of tools to manage a prison population does work, yet the number of prisoners on home detention curfew is lower now than it was 10 years ago. Between 2016 and 2018, an average of 288 prisoners were on home detention at any one time; during the same period ending in 2025, the average number was 87. We have tools at our disposal to manage the prison population and we need to use them. The same is true about the size of our prisons. We are going in two very different directions. On one side, we are considering gigantic prisons while, on the other, we are considering smaller ones that are more community oriented. We need to consider what the research is telling us about which kind suits our society best and which is best for rehabilitation.”
“He committed an act of violence and punishment is appropriate, but we agree with the Scottish Government that to assume prison is a panacea for all crime is to simplify the most complex of issues. As my colleague from across the chamber emphasised today, the aim of our justice system is twofold: to punish and to rehabilitate. In that instance, a prison sentence would surely have led to that man losing his home. Serving a custodial sentence would have meant that he was unable to work or pay his mortgage, and—as he is the primary carer for his children—it would have resulted in greater pressure on our children and family services, which would have come at a cost to our public purse and been to the detriment of the young people involved.”
“We now move to closing speeches. I call Yi-pee—sorry, Yi-pei—Chou Turvey to speak for up to four minutes. 15:50 Yi-pei Chou Turvey: Do not worry, Deputy Presiding Officer—Yi and pei are both pronounced like EE, the phone company, if that makes it easier to remember. This week, I spoke with the family of a man who was released on licence to serve his sentence in the community. He has been tagged with an electronic device and must stay within the four walls of his house from 7 o’clock every evening until 6 o’clock the following morning. He cannot leave his local authority and can travel only for work and social purposes. He must serve 300 hours of community service and pay a £3,000 fine. He admitted guilt.”
“I move amendment S7M-00446.4, to leave out from first “recognises” to end and insert: “; further believes that Scottish Government policy should work for every region of Scotland, with adequate public transport links, infrastructure and housing to meet the needs of communities and both traditional and emerging sectors of the economy; recognises the need for a dynamic and skilled workforce, as well as significant and targeted investment in Scotland’s world-class colleges and universities; further recognises that skilled inward migration is vital to sustaining key sectors of the economy; understands that the crisis in the NHS will only be addressed when considered alongside the crisis in the social care sector, and that migration is a key aspect of addressing those challenges; believes that Scotland has a proud history of offering safe harbour to refugees from across the world, and resolves to strive for a Scotland that protects the rights and interests of all, regardless of who they are or where they come from.””
“Mr Rennie, you will have to come to a conclusion. Willie Rennie: Rather than seek division, I want us to seek unity. We will not do that by dividing; we will only do it by uniting together to make a difference. Let us go for that. Let us achieve some goodness in this world.”
“The good solutions—it is about goodness—are what we should strive for. I want good, warm homes. I want to ensure that we have good and decently paid jobs. I want to have good, sustainable energy sources that are affordable for people. Helen McDade: Will the member give way? Willie Rennie: Not just now. I want good early intervention in education and mental health. I want a good, enlightened society that is internationalist, tolerant and open minded— good people who look for goodness in society. That might sound all gooey, but it is what our Parliament should strive for: the goodness in our society that brings out the best in our people. To deliver some of that— Helen McDade: Will the member take an intervention? Willie Rennie: No, I will not take an intervention just now. I have taken several interventions.”
“The carers I met at Balnacarron care home in St Andrews on Saturday, who had come from Nigeria, are wonderful people who do a fantastic job. If people come here and contribute, that is wonderful. Why use the term “our own people”? Let us ditch that language. Helen McDade: Will the member give way? Willie Rennie: Not just now—I am trying to address Mr Offord’s point. I do not disagree with the fundamental point that too many people are not economically active and are held back for a variety of reasons. However, rather than dividing those people from others, let us focus on what they need. Let us come up with the good solutions that can get them back to work. Malcolm Offord is nodding away, so why do Reform members not ditch the crap? They should ditch the language that divides, which does not help us at all.”
“That is why companies come from all over the world to base themselves here—to access the talent that comes from our colleges and universities and from our excellent schools. All of that comes together, which is why companies come here. Malcolm Offord: I agree with Mr Rennie, and I have been on the record many times talking about the 750,000 Scots of adult age who are not working. What is so wrong with us, in this chamber, recognising that and prioritising getting our own people back to work in good jobs in our community rather than bringing people in from outside the country? We have our own base of talent that we are not maximising. Why is it so controversial to say that we should get our own people back to work? Willie Rennie: There is another one of those terms—“our own people”. Who are “our own people”?”
“No matter where they come from, who they are or who they identify as, they are wonderful people whom we should cherish and support. Members will have heard me talk about my deep concern that so many people are economically inactive and that growing numbers of young people are unemployed and unable to find a job. I am concerned about the significant growth in issues around neurodivergence and mental health, and the fact that, in schools, more than 40 per cent of young people have an identified additional support need. That is a huge loss of talent and of good people, and we should look to provide the support that they deserve. That is not just good for them; it is good for us as well, because our greatest asset in our economy is our people.”
“I am sorry, but I am not going to allow an intervention. The intervention was on Mr Rennie, not on Mr Johnson. Willie Rennie: I do not want to speak for Mr Johnson, but I think that the Prime Minister corrected that and said that he regretted using that language. I just wish that Mr Kerr would reflect a bit more on the language that he uses, because it does him no favours. We all make mistakes—I have made plenty of mistakes in my life—but the important thing is that we understand when we get something wrong. We need a society that is cohesive and that pulls together, because we can achieve the society that we want only by pulling together and by working together in partnership rather than by pitting one part of the community against another. We have some wonderful people in our country.”
“I move amendment S7M-446.4, to leave out from “believes” to end and insert: “agrees that strong economic growth is essential to raising living standards, creating jobs and funding high- quality public services; notes with concern that, after nearly two decades of a Scottish National Party administration, Scotland continues to suffer from weak growth, low business confidence and poor productivity; further notes that Scotland has become the highest-taxed part of the UK, leaving workers paying more and making Scotland less competitive for investment, jobs and enterprise; recognises that Scotland’s economic prospects are strengthened by its place in the UK, which remains Scotland’s largest market and provides the stability, scale and security that businesses need to invest; believes that the Scottish Government should use the powers of the Scottish Parliament to grow the economy, lower the tax burden and support business, rather than pursue constitutional division, and calls on the Scottish Government to focus on making Scotland more competitive, more productive and more attractive as a place to work, invest and do business.””
“I am afraid that Mr Fraser must conclude and move his amendment. Murdo Fraser: I will get to that at the end of the sentence, Presiding Officer. If people across Scotland want a party on the centre-right that has grown-up policy solutions, that knows how to write motions in Parliament and that puts forward a credible platform to reduce taxes and improve economic growth, that party is not Reform, but the Scottish Conservatives. That point is made in my amendment, which I am very pleased to move.”
“Malcolm Offord has suggested that Scotland could have another referendum within 10 years. There are others, such as David Kirkwood, who has openly supported independence and said that he would vote for it once more. It is clear that Reform cannot be trusted when it comes to Scotland’s place in the United Kingdom. If people across Scotland want a party on the centre-right— Helen McDade: [Made a request to intervene.]”
“If only we had matched average UK growth rates over that period, we would have had billions more to spend on public services. As part of the economic backdrop, we need constitutional stability, which is why the SNP talking continually about independence does not help the situation. It does not help investment. Let us remember that the rest of the UK export market for goods and services from Scotland is worth three times what the EU single market is worth to Scottish businesses. However, the SNP’s bright idea is to take Scotland out of the United Kingdom so that we can forge closer links with Europe, which clearly would be to the detriment of our business community. We know that there are members on the Reform benches who are ambivalent about our place in the United Kingdom.”
“We have to move on. Perhaps we could speak to the content of the motion that is front of us. Murdo Fraser: I will go on all afternoon, if members wish me to. Let me talk a little bit about the motion, because Malcom Offord makes a significant point that I agree with: the need for “strong and sustained economic growth” as the starting point for getting everything right in our society. The first duty of Government should be to support that economic growth. Despite what Tom Arthur said earlier, Scotland has been badly let down over the past 19 years. Over the past decade, Scottish economic growth has lagged behind the rest of the UK. Even UK growth has not been great during that period, but Scottish growth has averaged only half of the UK rate.”
“I move amendment S7M-00446.1, to leave out from “strong and sustained economic growth” to end and insert: “only by fundamentally reducing inequality and creating an economy that works for everyone will Scotland be able to tackle division and hatred; condemns racism in all its forms and rejects a politics that aims to pit people against each other, exaggerating differences and exploiting disillusionment for personal political gain; agrees that building a fairer and more prosperous Scotland will depend on delivering economic growth that creates wealth and opportunities across the country and uses progressive taxation to fund strong public services; rejects the wasteful and short-sighted approach of the Scottish Government, which leaves working people in Scotland paying more but feeling like they are getting less in return, and believes that a better future for Scotland is possible but will depend on the Scottish Government finally unblocking housebuilding, reforming the skills system to support industry and workers and creating the energy jobs of the future so that the next generation continues to be better off than the last.” 15:31”
“Thank you for the point of order. I remind all members about the standing orders on dignity and respect in the chamber. I invite Mr Johnson to conclude his remarks. Daniel Johnson: I am sorry if my finger offended anyone. This is the 10th anniversary of Jo Cox’s death. Only six members of Parliament have lost their lives while serving in office. Jo Cox’s death in 2016 was at the hands of a right-wing extremist, and Sir David Amess’s death in 2021 was at the hands of an Islamic extremist. In the past 10 years, our politics has become more filled with hate, which we should reflect on. We must confront difficult issues, but we must reject the politics of hate and violence. It is up to members to choose which path they want to pursue.”
“Mr Johnson, there is a point of order. Julie MacDougall: Forgive me, Presiding Officer—I do not have the rule number in front of me, but I believe that my point of order comes under the rule on decency and courtesy. Pointing fingers in the chamber is disrespectful. We talked about respectful politics last week, but I cannot see much of that today.”
“That intervention was not credible, and Malcolm Offord should think again.”
“Before that, I remind everyone that they should be talking through the chair and not directly to individuals or groups. Malcolm Offord: I say to the member that the only incitement going on is coming from him as he raises his voice in this manner. [Interruption.] I said on the record last week, and I say it again now, that violence is never an answer to any problem. I will say it again: violence is never the answer to any problem, but that is not to ignore the problem. We need a cohesive society. Right now, we do not have that, and Reform is for cohesion in our communities. Daniel Johnson: If Malcolm Offord does not believe that violence is the answer, why does he use rhetoric about people being of fighting age? What does rhetoric about fighting invoke? It directly and explicitly invokes violence.”
“I move amendment S7M-00446.2 to leave out from first “believes” to end and insert: “condemns xenophobia, racism and hatred in society, including recent instances of intimidation, violence and disorder; further condemns the actions and language of those who seek to stoke such sentiments and division; agrees that such beliefs and actions do not reflect those of the vast majority of people living in Scotland, who value being a welcoming nation; welcomes the valuable contribution that migrants make to Scotland’s communities and economy; reaffirms the Scottish Parliament's commitment to human rights and equality for all; supports an economy that gives opportunities and helps to deliver investment through progressive taxation to sustain the public services on which everyone relies, and recognises the economic opportunity that a just transition can offer to Scotland through investment and innovation.””
“However, again—this is the crucial point—we need the skills, people and talent now if we are to seize this opportunity and build the foundations of our future economy and turn opportunity into jobs, wage growth and vibrant local economies. That is why I am asking the Parliament to work together to create the conditions to deliver growth, and to back the Government’s amendment.”
“You do not have time to take an intervention, minister. Tom Arthur: My sincere apologies, Liam Kerr. However, this is not the full story. Over and above the build-out of our energy grid, Scotland can secure billions more in investment across onshore and offshore wind, battery storage and hydro schemes, as well as new sectors such as heat networks, hydrogen and carbon capture and storage. Over the long term, forecasts estimate that up to almost 80,000 jobs could be supported by low-carbon energy sectors. We have the potential to harness that investment to make Scotland a leading exporter of renewable energy skills and innovative new technologies, and competitive in the global renewable supply chain.”
“The next item of business is a debate on motion S7M-00446, in the name of Malcolm Offord, on Scotland needs Reform: five years to 2031. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons now. 15:06”
“To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with specialist organisations regarding equipment and systems used to tackle wildfire and vegetation fires, in light of the increasing risk of such fires affecting rural communities, woodlands, parks and urban green and open spaces across Scotland. (S7O-00112)”
“Duncan Massey: Will the minister take an intervention? Gillian Martin: I will not, for fear that Mr Massey will get himself into trouble with the IPPC, because he has misquoted and mischaracterised it enough today. Duncan Massey: Read the report!”
“We are long past that point and, frankly, we are also long past the, “Is climate change real?” debate. I totally agree with Mark Ruskell that it is exhausting to revisit that argument, because it has been won and the science is there. We have heard some quite shameful misquoting from various highly respected scientific and advisory bodies that have advised Governments all over the world. I imagine that the ears of those on the IPPC must be burning because of some of the ways in which they have been mischaracterised. There has been talk about taking away the RCP 8.5 scenario, but that did not happen because there was no climate emergency; it happened because pathways towards decarbonisation were improving and the cost of renewable energy, in particular, was coming down, which meant that the scenario could be taken away as a result.”
“I call the cabinet secretary, who has up to 9 minutes. 17:32 Gillian Martin: I have, on the whole, very much enjoyed the debate and particularly enjoyed the contribution from Donald MacKinnon, who showed, even in just the five or six minutes for which he spoke, that he is willing to work across Parliament on a shared purpose. I warmly welcome that because, as I have already said many times in this session, delivery will be key and that delivery must come from those who share a common purpose. If we do not do that, we will repeat the mistakes of the past 10 years, since I came into Parliament, by being obsessed with, and agreeing on, targets but then seeing people fall away when it comes to even the most minute intervention through policy, legislation, or support for measures in the budget.”
“The member must come to a conclusion. Angela Ross: I am wrapping up. He said that the debate on climate change is “irrational”. I could not agree more. We must step past the head-butting arguments about whether climate change exists and take a sensible approach to policy that does not bankrupt us in the pursuit of targets. 17:26”
“The member must come to a conclusion. Angela Ross: Of course—I will just skip a few bits. Is it really an emergency when, over the past two decades, we have seen such a significant drop? The emission target has dropped. Let us be clear: the real crisis that people feel today is financial. When energy bills are high and 23 per cent of the costs are for subsidies and green levies, businesses and families are really feeling the strain. The catastrophic deindustrialisation that we have seen has removed jobs and the opportunity for self-sufficiency and growth. I want to move to something slightly more positive, which, actually, comes from the words of Tony Blair.”
“Ambition without delivery is failure, and Scotland cannot afford any more failure. 17:10”
“On Duncan Massey’s contribution, I do not believe that the task before us is simply to challenge the science; it is to respond to the science with realistic timescales, practical policies and credible plans, because climate policy cannot exist in isolation from economic realities. We must recognise the role of domestic oil and gas as part of a transition and support those who are already delivering for our environment across rural Scotland. The Scottish Conservatives support action on climate change, but it must be credible, affordable and deliverable. That is the approach that is set out in our amendment, because we currently have a Government that is failing to meet its targets, deliver a truly just transition and provide the clear plan that people and businesses need.”
“Finlay Carson: Yes—if I can get the time back. Katie Hagmann: What I would add to the debate and highlight to Finlay Carson is that, although some campaign groups are very loud, the hundreds of young people who come to me and who want to support green policies are often not heard. Although it is great to listen to one side of the argument, I invite the member to listen to both sides. Finlay Carson: I think that we do. There is no denying that everyone sees renewables as part of our future, but having areas of Galloway industrialised by massive turbines against the will of the vast majority of people in the community is just not acceptable.”
“However, she found it difficult to point to a clear and practical policy that genuinely supports farmers in making the transition. That is the issue. Although change is happening, there is no clear road map to support it, and that risks becoming an unmanaged decline. I welcome David Barratt’s recognition of the challenges facing communities in areas such as Galloway, where large-scale wind, solar and battery developments and the infrastructure that comes with them are having a growing impact. However, I was particularly disappointed that Katie Hagmann failed to recognise those concerns, especially given that she represents a community that, for many years has had campaigns such as Hands Off Our Hills and has felt increasingly ignored by her Government. Katie Hagmann: Will the member take an intervention?”
“Specifically on land use, what policies do the Conservatives want to bring forward that would see emissions reduction in rural spaces and in relation to land use? Finlay Carson: I took three interventions in my opening speech, so I ran out of time to talk about that. One point is that we want an increase in the budget by £50 million, which would address some of the issues, rather than the year-on-year cut that we have seen from the SNP Government. Getting the balance right is essential, as we have heard clearly today. Claire Baker raised concerns about the continued reduction in livestock numbers and what that means for rural Scotland. Heather Anderson, in a thoughtful contribution, reflected the experience of many in the sector.”
“Apologies. In the previous session, we saw that clearly in the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee, where witnesses pointed to a gap between ambition and implementation and a lack of the detailed policies that are needed to deliver. Reaching net zero will require significant changes across our economy, with real costs and trade-offs. That change must happen over timescales that are practical and achievable. If we move too slowly, we fail to act but, if we move too quickly without a plan, we risk damaging rural communities and businesses and our wider economy. Gillian Martin: I asked Finlay Carson during his opening speech to outline Conservative policies that we could discuss and which could result in emissions reduction.”
“However, the issue, which has been highlighted throughout the debate, is not about ambition; it about whether the ambition is backed by credible and deliverable policy. Too often, what we hear from the Scottish Government is overly optimistic and is about progress that is not reflected in reality. Scotland has missed emissions targets in eight of the past 12 years and the 2030 interim target has been abandoned. Progress has stalled in key sectors, including transport, buildings and agriculture. When ministers highlight isolated successes, they risk obscuring the central problem, which is the gap between ambition and delivery. That matters, because public confidence depends on targets being credible, achievable and backed by real plans. Katie Hagmann: Will the member take an intervention? Finlay Carson: I am sorry, but I do not have time.”
“We talk about the Norwegian sovereign wealth fund, but what about community sovereign wealth funds, so that communities can really invest, we can overcome rural poverty and we can help sustainability to thrive in those areas again, never mind giving them access to free electricity? I urge ministers to please lead. I like the tone on where we are going, but I ask ministers to hear and engage our communities going forward, as this is a national emergency for all of us. 17:05 Finlay Carson: This has been an important and wide-ranging debate, and I thank members from across the chamber for their contributions. There is common ground. We recognise the reality and impacts of climate change, we support climate action and we support Scotland’s ambition to reach net zero by 2045—well, most of us do.”
“We need to be much more ambitious in that regard. In Scotland—I will pick this up with Katie Hagmann— only about £30 million was given to community benefit projects in 2025. That is tragic when you look at the fact that the industry is worth £100 billion. Investment of 0.03 per cent is paltry. We have to do better than that and be ambitious in our thinking about how we are going to take people with us. We urgently need a national plan on what renewable energy infrastructure we need, where we need it and how much we need per region, and it is in the Scottish Government’s powers to produce that. That would give people security and continuity. Within that, people also want to know what they can get from renewable energy. Community benefit should in part be community ownership. Where is the ambition for that?”
“Do not get distracted by other issues. When you came on to the scene, the environment and the driving forward of the message of the climate emergency were always seen to be part of your mandate. It would be good to see more of that. Another area that I am worried about came up as a top priority when I knocked on thousands of doors, and it has been one of the main issues discussed by several members in this debate: what is happening with renewable energy infrastructure, particularly in our rural communities in the Highlands and right across the south of Scotland. People feel as though it is happening to them and not with them. People who are naturally inclined to support the movement towards our net zero ambitions and the industry that we require around it are feeling as though it is being imposed on them.”