Committee
Environment and Rural Development Committee, 14 Feb 2007
14 Feb 2007 · S2 · Environment and Rural Development Committee
Item of business
Cairngorms National Park Boundary Bill: Stage 1
I will answer your second question first. We do not have up-to-date comparators from other countries. When we were drafting the National Parks (Scotland) Bill we did a lot of work to see how other national parks operated, because we had never had them in Scotland—we were 50 years behind the rest of the UK. A lot of work was done in considering what kind of national parks we should have. You might remember that in Scotland we came up with a new way to deal with national parks compared with what happens in the rest of the UK.Your suggestion is a good one, so I will consider with officials whether we want to pursue it. I thought that you might raise issues relating to proposals for other national parks in Scotland that are in the ether, which is what I am more seized of. When we created the Cairngorms national park, there was a lot of nervousness about it in the business community. Rather than rushing in, we listened to its concerns and considered the opportunities that the park would bring and how we could knock the perceived disbenefits out of the way. We have to listen to people. First time round, we considered how to get the park right. This time—three years on—I have been considering what the benefits have been and what lessons there are for the rest of Scotland. I am happy to consider the international comparisons, which would be a healthy development.On financial implications, following your evidence-taking session, you received a submission from Jane Hope of the Cairngorms National Park Authority, who was clear about the authority's perspective on the committed costs, year-on-year costs and new costs, which would have to be factored in. We would have to redo all the literature, signage, the whole park plan process and the committed work that has been done on the local plan process.The key thing that I am concerned about is the additional work that would result from adding such a sizeable area, such as work on planning and governance structures. We would have to consider whether the staff of the park were equipped. Excellent work is being done on the core paths network, but we would want to be sure about what extra resources were provided for that.Our estimate is that the year-on-year costs for adding to the national park would be between £100,000 and £150,000. That is not in the budget. We would have to spread the cake more thinly around the rest of the national park, which I do not think would be a good outcome.
In the same item of business
The Convener (Maureen Macmillan):
Lab
Good morning. I welcome members, witnesses and members of the public and the press. We have received apologies from Richard Lochhead.Item 1 is the final evid...
The Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development (Sarah Boyack):
Lab
I have with me Helen Jones and Mike Liddle, who are working on national parks.I will take a few minutes to put three issues on to the agenda for the committe...
The Convener:
Lab
That was useful, minister. A number of members have questions.
Peter Peacock (Highlands and Islands) (Lab):
Lab
I draw members' attention to my interests on the matter that I have previously declared.I am grateful to the minister for setting out the reasoning behind th...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
With the park plan, we would basically have to go back to the drawing board and draft another one. A significant area would have been added to the park, so b...
Peter Peacock:
Lab
There was one about the legislative position.
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
Even if the bill was passed, we would have to go back and amend the original National Parks (Scotland) Bill because of issues to do with the boundaries and t...
Helen Jones (Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs Department):
That is correct. If the park boundary were changed now by passing the bill, which is primary legislation, there would still be issues to be considered about ...
Elaine Smith (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab):
Lab
Minister, you say that it would be better to wait until 2008. Will the review that takes place then consider the boundary, and will there be consultation aro...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
It will be for ministers to set the terms of the quinquennial review. In 2004, the First Minister said that he expected that the issue of boundaries would be...
Elaine Smith:
Lab
I just thought that it was important to get that stated clearly at this stage.
Peter Peacock:
Lab
It is helpful to have that reassurance about the quinquennial review, but let us be absolutely clear about this. It is your firm contention that, notwithstan...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
I would not want to predict the outcome of what would be quite a complicated set of processes that would be put in chain. My main comment is that passing the...
Peter Peacock:
Lab
I want to raise a completely different issue, but I am happy to leave it there.
The Convener:
Lab
Perhaps we will come back to that later.
Mr Alasdair Morrison (Western Isles) (Lab):
Lab
There are two issues that I would like to pursue. First, in your opening statement, you talked about the significant financial implications of the bill. Woul...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
I will answer your second question first. We do not have up-to-date comparators from other countries. When we were drafting the National Parks (Scotland) Bil...
Mr Ted Brocklebank (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con):
Con
Notwithstanding the minister's eloquent advocacy in her presentation, I found the evidence presented last week at Blair Atholl on extending the boundaries of...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
It would be my firm expectation that the whole issue of boundaries would be considered in the quinquennial review, although I cannot prejudge the outcome of ...
Mr Brocklebank:
Con
I heard what you said about the year-on-year costs of taking on an extra part of the park. If the quinquennial review concluded that there should be addition...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
A year from now will be the quinquennial review stage and, as Peter Peacock said, there will be no instant change on the ground at that point. Ted Brockleban...
Mr Brocklebank:
Con
You are saying that it makes more economic sense to stick a pillar into the ground at Drumochter that you are prepared to accept might have to be lifted out ...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
As I said, either we park the stone where it is at the moment or we get it out there. That is a judgment for the park authority to make. I would just like th...
Rob Gibson (Highlands and Islands) (SNP):
SNP
The minister made much of the unwieldy nature of the administration that would be needed to add Blair Atholl to the park. She also said that this is the bigg...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
No. The committee had a robust discussion last week, and the John Muir Trust was clear that if it had its way, most of the Highlands and Islands would be a n...
Rob Gibson:
SNP
So, if we are thinking big, presumably we want to take into account the environmental and topographical integrity of the decisions that were made. I hear you...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
You imply that they were not considered the first time round, but I assure you that they were; we just did not agree on where the boundaries should be drawn....
Rob Gibson:
SNP
Absolutely.I will move on, as it appears that the reasons why certain aspects of topography were excluded will not be elicited from the Government. The reaso...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
I ask Helen Jones to answer that.
Helen Jones:
Do you mean the efficiency savings from the current operation of the park?