Climate Delivery Oversight Group minutes: March 2025

Attendees and apologies

• Councillor Macgregor (Co Chair), COSLA
• Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy (Co Chair)
• Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government
• Cabinet Secretary for Transport
• Councillor Aitken, Scottish Cities Alliance
• Councillor Heddle, COSLA  (Joined online)
• Phil Raines, Joint Deputy Director, Domestic Climate Change, Scottish Government
• Heather Cowan, Head of Transport Climate Change and Just Transition
• Ellen Leaver, Director, Local Government and Analytical Services, Scottish Government
• James Fowlie - Director of Place Policy, COSLA
• Robert Nicol - Chief Officer Environment and Economy, COSLA
• Mary Kerr - Climate Finance Manager, Glasgow City Council
• Gavin Slater – Head of Sustainability, Glasgow City Council
• David Mallon - Head of Policy and Implementation Unit, Domestic Climate Change, Scottish Government

Secretariat

• Junior Official, Domestic Climate Change
• Amanda Fox, Head of Strategy and Governance, Domestic Climate Change

Apologies

• Minister for Employment and Investment

Items and actions

Welcome and introduction

Councillor MacGregor chaired the meeting (as per per the Terms of Reference) and welcomed members and presenters to the meeting.

Update on actions from the previous meeting

An update on the actions was provided.  All actions were either completed or underway. A paper was provided to the group that gave an update on actions taken to address the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee’s Inquiry on ‘The role of local government and its cross-sectoral partners in financing and delivering a net-zero Scotland’.  The action relating to the Senior Officials Group was picked up in the agenda.

Update from Glasgow City Council

Officials from Glasgow City Council (GCC) gave a presentation on the development of a, ‘Model for Private Investment in Glasgow City Council’. Key points from the presentation included:

• following estimation of the costs associated with delivery of GCC’s net zero target a mechanism was required to enable access to the level of funding required which was beyond the available budget in GCC
• a fully defined pipeline of projects was unnecessary to drive progress as potential investors were keen to contribute to shaping the pipeline of investible projects
• multiple models of blended funding: financing models were explored as one size did not fit all and consideration needed to be given to both the delivery and investment vehicles
• any support model needed to include social value and just transition principles
• capacity and capability within local authorities (LAs) needs to be developed and external expertise brought in to fill any potential gaps
• robust governance must be developed and implemented

The chair welcomed and thanked GCC for their presentation.  The group complemented the work undertaken. The rigour in which the proposal had been developed and taken forward was noted; this was trailblazing work. 

The floor was opened to questions and the discussion that followed focused around:

• how GCC was drawing on expertise, funding and support from a variety of providers
• the potential impact of future legislation in enabling the development of highly investible propositions for private investors eg heat networks providing competitively priced energy whilst being mindful of potential unintended consequences
• exploring bulk purchasing of energy to stabilise energy prices and the potential tension with the generation of sufficient revenue for the investor.  It was noted that there was a need to balance the financial return against the broader social outcomes that were to be achieved  
• recognition that achievement of an investible proposition required a package of interventions e.g. including heat generation, EV charging and solar etc in a single package
• different options of support, including accessing loans, and what was required to enable successful applications. It was noted that this was being considered as part of the ‘investment vehicle’. Any successful application was likely to require establishing volume and hence the need to develop a package of interventions. This also brought with it risks for the Council in terms of owning capital which highlighted why private investment was an attractive option
• the role for a national energy company
• the importance of ensuring that the learnings developed in GCC were shared across LAs to allow others to progress similar funding: financing models at pace. It was noted that it was essential that the knowledge transfer activity that GCC was currently undertaking needed to be balanced against the need to progress the project
• the development of an investors network.  Continuous engagement with investors was needed whilst the project was developing; this was vital to keep potential investors onboard

Overview of timescales and milestones in the Climate Change Plan

Scottish Government presented a paper to the group.  The paper highlighted the timeframes for developing carbon budgets and the CCP and the need for these to be supported by evidence and impact assessments. Information was provided on the timeline for taking forward the necessary secondary legislation (regulations). The Scottish Parliament should complete their consideration of the regulations in September 2025, at which point a draft CCP would be expected, with a final CCP to be finalised before the next Scottish Parliament election by May 2026.

LA input was invaluable to developing this work. Key areas of discussion at the meeting were around:

• the net zero targets that LAs had set and the potential barriers that exist in a LA that makes setting such a target challenging.  Targeted support was needed to enable all LAs to establish and deliver a path to net zero
• the opportunities, issues and challenges a LA might experience if national carbon budget targets required action at pace.  It was clear that the future CCP needed to capture all that was being done at LA level whilst also identifying how and where there was a need to go further to enable achievement of the 2045 target
• where there were specific barriers to progressing emissions reduction in Scotland and whether these were impacted by the specific place eg urban, rural, more remote and island etc

The group noted that the time frames for bringing forward carbon budgets, up to 2045, and the final CCP were exceptionally tight. There was agreement that this was a shared endeavour.

The conversation moved onto how the necessary action to take us to 2045 could be funded and there was recognition that LA funding and financing may need to transition to enable delivery of collective climate ambitions. It was noted that this was a challenging discussion that needed to be had particularly as wider considerations should be taken into account. 

Examples were provided of where progress was being made and successes gained. It was recognised that more needed to be done to share these good news messages.

Views were also sought on how best to engage with LAs and whether engagement at councillor and, or official level was preferable.  Further discussions amongst officials would take place to bottom this out.

Evidence was key to making informed decisions of where interventions could be applied. Discussion focused on how the Scottish Climate Intelligence Service (SCIS) was a tool that would not only provide the necessary evidence to support LAs in identifying their base level emissions but also would support how to develop a pathway to deliver to net zero.

Overview of the first Senior Officials Group meeting 

A Senior Officials Group (SOG) has been established to support delivery of the ambitions of the Climate Delivery Framework (CDF) and specifically aid delivery. 

An update was given on the current status of the Group. It was confirmed that the Group had its first meeting.  During that meeting the group reviewed the CDF architecture, the terms of reference for the SOG, and considered the early priorities for the CDOG.  The SOG also discussed how activity arising from the CDF would be resourced to enable delivery.  This was a significant issue, and it was recognised that capacity was limited across organisations and so different approaches would be required. It was noted that there was strong benefit in drawing in external expertise where necessary.

Any other business

Questions arose around the update paper provided that gave the current status on the actions taken to address the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee’s Inquiry on ‘The role of local government and its cross-sectoral partners in financing and delivering a net-zero Scotland’. Specific queries related to the current position on; the infrastructure levy that was paused, and the decarbonisation of heat in buildings and transport.

It was confirmed that HiB would be included in the CCP alongside other areas. Funding for the Home Energy Scheme and other grants had been protected and a focus was being directed to area-based schemes given their growth.

The chair thanked everyone for their attendance and valuable contributions and the meeting closed.