To ask the Scottish Government when it will publish further details of the estimated true cost of its net zero policies for households in Scotland. (S6O-05285)

The draft climate change plan, which was published on 6 November, is the first climate change plan in the United Kingdom to set out an assessment of the costs and benefits of the policies within it. Most of those financial benefits are expected to accrue to households and businesses. The draft plan includes the net cost, which is financial costs minus financial benefits, of delivering its policies. That is in line with the approach that is used by the Scottish Fiscal Commission and the Climate Change Committee. That cost to the Scottish economy from 2026 to 2040 is estimated at £4.8 billion.

We are seeking views on the presentation of costs and benefits during the plan’s consultation period and will consider those for the final publication.

The much-delayed climate change plan that the Cabinet secretary mentions revealed that the Scottish National Party’s net zero plan will cost the Scottish economy £4.8 billion by 2040, as she has said. The plan also admits that many of the proposals have not been fully costed. There is a lack of detail on how those costs will be split between households, businesses and the public sector. Will the cabinet secretary commit to publishing more detail on those proposals, including how much the average Scottish household will be left out of pocket by the plan?

It is a 15-year plan. Uncertainty around United Kingdom Government action, technological advancements and market decisions make the distribution of costs extremely challenging to estimate. We have set out the costs in line with the legislation. We know that the scale of change that will be needed for the next part of our net zero journey is significant, and that delivering our net zero target by 2045 will require the transformation of our economy and society, underpinned by sustained investment, both public and private. I end by quoting Professor Graeme Roy, the chair of the Scottish Fiscal Commission, who said:

“Doing nothing, not responding to the challenge of climate change, will be far more expensive and damaging to the public finances than investing in net zero … it is simply not an option.”

I agree whole-heartedly with Professor Roy.

We have a number of supplementaries, which I hope will be brief.

It is vital that we ensure that Scotland’s buildings become warmer, greener and cheaper. However, the high cost of energy continues to be prohibitive to many energy-efficient heating upgrades. Do you agree that we need substantial reform of the energy system to achieve affordable climate goals? Can you give any more detail on the Scottish Government’s work?

Members should speak through the chair.

Bill Kidd is absolutely right that, in an energy-rich nation such as Scotland, no household should be struggling to heat their home. Measures that were announced by the Chancellor will reduce average Bills by only £12 a month, while significantly scaling back investment in energy efficiency and clean heating, when those are the actions that would cut bills permanently. Most powers in this area are reserved to the UK Government, so it is important that it uses its full powers and the levers at its disposal to make clean heating more affordable. It is vital that the electricity and gas markets are further reformed.

On the Scottish Government’s work towards energy efficiency, we recently consulted on proposals for homes in the domestic private rented centre to meet new energy performance certificate heat retention rating band C by the end of 2033. The requirement will apply to new tenancies from 2028. We also recently introduced new regulations on energy performance certificates, which will bring an improved EPC rating system into force. We are taking steps to ensure that poor energy efficiency is no longer a driver of Fuel Poverty, which will positively contribute to the eradication of child poverty.

We will need brevity in both questions and responses.

I very much agree that the lack of action there has a cost. It is really important to look at it at a local level. Will the Cabinet secretary comment on why we are not getting the same focus on the homes that are vulnerable to flooding? At the moment, the figure for that is 284,000 homes, and the Scottish Government’s website says that another 100,000 will be vulnerable to flooding over the next few decades. What will be done to ramp up support for households that are currently at risk?

If the member does not mind my saying so, that is a bit of a tangential question about flooding, although it is an important issue. Most of the flood protection schemes are in the hands of local authorities, which are given substantial funding to put them into action. Given that the initial question was not about flooding, I might have to write to Sarah Boyack to give her more detail.

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests. This week, I met local home owners and constituents in Glasgow who spoke passionately about the co-operative retrofit model. The model works in communities to share information about options for retrofitting for all income groups. Is the Cabinet secretary aware of the co-operative work in that space? What support could she provide to help communities and local industry to replicate and adapt the co-operative retrofit model for their areas, including community organising, peer support, specialist consultancy, and start-up grants?

I am always keen to hear about action that is happening on the ground that can be replicated throughout the country. Certainly, I will take an interest in that particular scheme, and I will pass on the comments to Màiri McAllan, the Cabinet Secretary for Housing, whose portfolio might have appropriate levers in place.