Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)

I will go back to biodiversity. The nature restoration plan is in train. Is there tracking looking at the higher ambition of the nature restoration plan to meet all of the articled requirements in terms of rewetting peat soils and woodlands, etc? Is that being given consideration in the context of potential for carbon sequestration? The witnesses are also right to say the land use plan needs to be brought forward and that it could be at odds with forestry targets. If we look at the trade-offs of restoring nature versus looking at land for planting forestry, that could be a real challenge.

My next question relates to overshoot and the option to carry that over into the next budgetary cycle. How onerous is that? Does it put any extra burden on the subsequent budgetary period, given that we already have an overshoot from the previous one?

Another question is on the public submission from Professor John Sweeney, Professor Barry McMullin and Mr. Paul Price. One of its recommendations states it is essential that the Government urgently bring forward substantial, new and additional interventions to directly and reliably reduce greenhouse gas emissions more quickly than has been achieved to date. I know we had a previous discussion because it is also politically challenging. That is our job. Does the council have a view on what is being recommended in that public submission?