Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Committee

Local Government and Communities Committee 31 October 2018

31 Oct 2018 · S5 · Local Government and Communities Committee

Item of business

Planning (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Ruskell, Mark Green Mid Scotland and Fife Watch on SPTV

The inspiration for amendment 318 came from the Scottish Parliament’s first ever inquiry into air quality, which the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee undertook last year. The committee came to the strong conclusion that consideration of air quality issues had not been adequately embedded in the planning system and that change was needed in that respect. Last week, the minister talked about creating great places. However, great places are also healthy places, and the reality is that every year 2,000 people die partly as a result of air pollution. There are, of course, statutory limits on the levels of pollutants in our air, and where those levels are persistently breached, that leads to the designation of an air quality management area. There are 32 such areas around Scotland, and the designation leads to the production of action plans, led by councils, in an attempt to drive pollutant levels back under legal limits. However, there is no explicit link to the planning system. Most AQMAs are designated on the basis of transport emissions, but there is evidence that major developments are being approved without adequate mitigation measures being put in place, which effectively locks in illegal levels of pollution. An example that I would point to is a major housing allocation in Scone, where it was demonstrated that the building of 700 houses would have a significant impact on two AQMAs in Perth. That led to the director of public health for NHS Tayside lodging a formal objection to the development. It was finally agreed in discussions around phasing that only part of the development could be constructed ahead of a relief road being built to take traffic away from the two AQMAs, but that was very much an afterthought in the planning process; indeed, the proposal was considered at all only after a vociferous campaign by local communities. My amendment 318 seeks to rectify the situation by elevating the consideration of air quality issues in planning, and it would apply to decisions taken for major developments in AQMAs and areas that are on the cusp of being so designated as a result of persistently high pollution levels. Back in the summer, I lodged an amendment that would have applied to all applications, both major and minor, but I have now withdrawn that and relodged it as amendment 318 to ensure that the provision would apply only to major developments. Any increases in air pollution from a minor development would be relatively insignificant, whereas major developments go through an environmental assessment screening process with, if appropriate, a full assessment being produced alongside traffic impact assessments. That should provide a robust basis upon which planning authorities can consider air quality issues. The amendment is not about stopping development per se, but about ensuring that, if a planning authority wishes to approve a major development in an AQMA, mitigation must be fully considered and acted on. What is the point of having legally binding targets if they have little weight when it comes to planning decisions and are just to be considered as part of the balance of issues, as the minister put it last week? The failure to embed air quality in plans has led to successful legal actions against the United Kingdom and Scottish Governments in recent years. The committee has the opportunity to protect human health and create great places by agreeing to the amendment. I move amendment 318.

Search Hansard contributions

Local Government and Communities Committee 31 October 2018

In the same item of business