Chamber
Plenary, 01 Apr 2004
01 Apr 2004 · S2 · Plenary
Item of business
Planning
I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak to Parliament about our plans for modernising the planning system. Today, I am publishing two consultation papers—"Making Development Plans Deliver" and "Rights of Appeal in Planning". I am also publishing our first national planning framework for Scotland. Those are major elements in our drive to modernise the planning system and they will ensure that the system is fit for the needs of the new century. This morning, I will explain why planning remains important; set out why reform is necessary; outline the content of the three documents; and describe the next steps in our programme.
Why does planning matter so much? We all know that people and places are important and it is the planning system that brings people and places together. Planning policies and decisions make a significant impact on our economy, our environment and our communities: get them right and we make real progress on economic competitiveness, environmental protection and social justice; get them wrong and we fail to deliver on our commitment to sustainable development. We must enable things to happen where they should and prevent them from happening where they should not. That is the challenge that I am determined we will meet.
The planning system is often criticised. Sometimes the criticism is unjust, but sometimes it is justified. I believe that there are real grounds for concern about delays in decision making and failures to keep plans up to date. We know and understand that the planning system in its foundation and operation is crucial to encouraging economic growth. However, we need to be clear that different stakeholders want different things from the planning system. For example, community and environmental groups generally expect councils to take decisions in line with the development plan, whereas business and property interests often argue that councils are too inflexible.
The consultation that I am publishing today attempts to strike a balance between those two positions. It supports and takes forward the partnership agreement commitment to
"improve the planning system to strengthen the involvement of communities, speed up decisions, reflect local views better, and allow quicker investment decisions".
That commitment is, of course, set against the background of the Executive's commitments to grow the economy and to secure environmental justice.
Modernising the development planning system to produce up-to-date, relevant and accessible plans is a fundamental reform. The conclusions of the "Review of Strategic Planning", which was published in 2002, set out our decisions on the shape of the development planning system. One of the outcomes was that the current practice of having two tiers of development plans throughout Scotland should be discontinued. We agreed that there would be city-region plans for only the four largest cities—Aberdeen, Dundee, Edinburgh and Glasgow—where land use and infrastructure issues transcend local authority boundaries.
Our new consultation paper, "Making Development Plans Deliver", sets out detailed proposals on city-region plans and ways in which local planning can become more effective in commanding support for and delivering development and regeneration. Discussions with local authorities and other key stakeholders have helped to shape the proposals, as has pilot work with Highland Council and South Lanarkshire Council.
The consultation paper notes the often poor record of local authorities in keeping their plans up to date and achieving measurable outcomes. We propose a range of options to ensure that development plans are kept up to date, including a statutory requirement to review plans at least every five years.
Our proposals to modernise development planning centre around four key themes. The first is consultation. Full and effective engagement with communities, business interests and key public bodies is critical and must be more effectively targeted. Among the options are a statutory duty for key public agencies to engage in the development plan process and the introduction of neighbour notification for site-specific proposals in local development plans.
The second theme is content. We want shorter plans that are focused on genuine planning and development issues, with greater consistency throughout Scotland in the style of plans. The third theme is management. Staff and resources must be managed effectively from the outset of plan preparation. That requires political commitment, effective leadership and a project management approach. The final theme is delivery. Development plans must focus more on outcomes, with action plans setting out the steps required to deliver the plans' aims.
Some proposals will require legislative change, but, for the most part, modernising the development planning system need not necessarily require changes to statutory procedures—it is about better management of the process. Our aim is to change the culture of development planning to one that is managed effectively from the outset, where there is greater consensus on the nature and scale of change and where proper, rigorous community consultation and delivery are key. Statutory development plans matter. They can and must make a difference. It is essential that all key stakeholders play their part.
We all know that the subject of rights of appeal in planning is controversial. Applicants have a right of appeal to the Scottish ministers against a refusal of planning permission or against the conditions attached to a consent. "Third party" is the term that is generally applied to anyone other than an applicant or planning authority. Third parties have many opportunities to participate in planning policy and decision making, but they do not have a right of appeal if they disagree with a local authority's decision. Some people see that as an imbalance in the planning system. Others consider that members of the public have plenty of opportunities to influence planning and that extending the right to appeal might cause significant and unnecessary delay.
"Your place, your plan: A White Paper on Public Involvement in Planning", which was published a year ago, set out our proposals to strengthen public involvement in the planning system. It included a commitment to consult on third-party planning appeals. The paper recognised that the matter is complex and has potentially significant implications for the planning system. The partnership agreement further defined the subject of the consultation. It stated:
"We will consult on new rights of appeal in planning cases where the local authority involved has an interest, where the application is contrary to the local plan, when planning officers have recommended rejection or where an Environmental Impact Assessment is needed."
I emphasise that the consultation that we are launching today takes a neutral standpoint. "Rights of Appeal in Planning" seeks views on whether we should introduce new rights of appeal. If we do not, are there other ways in which to address the concerns that lie behind demands for third-party appeals? If we do, how might we best design the appeal system?
One of our options is to make no change to the right of appeal. We do not want imbalance in the planning system, but it is in no one's interest to have a planning system that does not support growth or provide necessary development such as housing. We know that we shall have to make a hard decision and we shall not shirk that responsibility.
The consultation paper on rights of appeal sets out four possible ways forward, but it does not recommend a specific proposal and we will listen to the views that we receive. The first model that we are consulting on involves a right of appeal for third parties in the circumstances set out in the partnership agreement. Secondly, at the other end of the spectrum, we might not introduce further rights of appeal. However, that would not mean that there would be no change in the planning system; we would still intend to advance our existing programme of reform to tackle the issues that underlie the current calls for third-party appeal. A third possibility is to improve procedures in local authorities for dealing with controversial planning applications without altering the right of appeal. The final model sets out a new system for planning appeals that differs from the current process and involves some related changes to the planning system.
I know and understand that there are passionately held views both for and against a third-party right of appeal. We worked with a stakeholder group that was drawn from a wide range of interests to ensure that we explored those points of view. Some people believe that the issue of a third-party right of appeal is straightforward and that, quite simply, there should be such a right or that, quite simply, there should not. The issues and potential implications are aired in the paper.
The debate is important and it is essential that stakeholders engage in the process. The outcome of the consultation is far from being a foregone conclusion. We want people to respond to us, to inform our final decision; we want them to ensure that the decision that we take is informed and consistent and meets the needs of Scotland in terms of economic growth and social justice.
The third and equally important publication that we are issuing today is the "National Planning Framework for Scotland". We announced the decision to draw up the framework as one of our conclusions on the review of strategic planning. There has been extensive stakeholder engagement in drawing up the framework. We held a range of seminars across Scotland and I am pleased that there was strong support for tackling issues such as economic development, transport, water and drainage, affordable housing and waste.
The national planning framework is a key element in our package of planning reforms and it represents an important first step in addressing the challenges of Scotland's long-term development. The framework examines how Scotland is likely to change over the next 15 to 20 years, analyses the underlying trends in Scotland's development and the key drivers of change, and links with other key Executive policies on economic development and regeneration. The framework will help to guide the spatial development of Scotland and will provide a context for development plans and planning decisions. We plan to update it every four years.
The framework considers key points, such as the challenges and opportunities of Scotland's location and the importance of the Edinburgh-Glasgow relationship. It identifies the east coast as a key strategic corridor and it emphasises Ayrshire—where Prestwick airport and Hunterston play such an important role—and, of course, the key role that rural Scotland plays in our development. The framework is a planning document and will feed into the strategic projects review on transport and into decisions on area regeneration and priorities for expenditure on water and drainage.
In conclusion, the consultation papers, "Making Development Plans Deliver" and "Rights of Appeal in Planning", will be out for consultation during the next four months. The consultation will be a very active process. My deputy Mary Mulligan, officials and I will take the debate to our stakeholders in business and property, in environmental and community groups and in professional organisations. The Deputy First Minister will also continue his dialogue with business and planning will be on his agenda.
It is important to remember that other issues are being taken forward in relation to the planning reform agenda, including e-planning, design and the modernisation of our planning inquiry system. The Barker review of housing supply, our review of affordable housing and the implications of those reviews for the future of housing in Scotland are factors that we will consider in our reform of the planning system.
We are undertaking a large programme of important work and, to assist stakeholders, I will bring our final proposals together in a single document, which will identify elements that require primary legislation, elements that require secondary legislation and elements that can be dealt with through guidance.
The planning system deals with wide and complex issues, but we are determined that it should be modernised to meet the challenges of 21st century Scotland and to balance the needs of community and business. Today represents another stage in our reform of Scotland's planning system.
Why does planning matter so much? We all know that people and places are important and it is the planning system that brings people and places together. Planning policies and decisions make a significant impact on our economy, our environment and our communities: get them right and we make real progress on economic competitiveness, environmental protection and social justice; get them wrong and we fail to deliver on our commitment to sustainable development. We must enable things to happen where they should and prevent them from happening where they should not. That is the challenge that I am determined we will meet.
The planning system is often criticised. Sometimes the criticism is unjust, but sometimes it is justified. I believe that there are real grounds for concern about delays in decision making and failures to keep plans up to date. We know and understand that the planning system in its foundation and operation is crucial to encouraging economic growth. However, we need to be clear that different stakeholders want different things from the planning system. For example, community and environmental groups generally expect councils to take decisions in line with the development plan, whereas business and property interests often argue that councils are too inflexible.
The consultation that I am publishing today attempts to strike a balance between those two positions. It supports and takes forward the partnership agreement commitment to
"improve the planning system to strengthen the involvement of communities, speed up decisions, reflect local views better, and allow quicker investment decisions".
That commitment is, of course, set against the background of the Executive's commitments to grow the economy and to secure environmental justice.
Modernising the development planning system to produce up-to-date, relevant and accessible plans is a fundamental reform. The conclusions of the "Review of Strategic Planning", which was published in 2002, set out our decisions on the shape of the development planning system. One of the outcomes was that the current practice of having two tiers of development plans throughout Scotland should be discontinued. We agreed that there would be city-region plans for only the four largest cities—Aberdeen, Dundee, Edinburgh and Glasgow—where land use and infrastructure issues transcend local authority boundaries.
Our new consultation paper, "Making Development Plans Deliver", sets out detailed proposals on city-region plans and ways in which local planning can become more effective in commanding support for and delivering development and regeneration. Discussions with local authorities and other key stakeholders have helped to shape the proposals, as has pilot work with Highland Council and South Lanarkshire Council.
The consultation paper notes the often poor record of local authorities in keeping their plans up to date and achieving measurable outcomes. We propose a range of options to ensure that development plans are kept up to date, including a statutory requirement to review plans at least every five years.
Our proposals to modernise development planning centre around four key themes. The first is consultation. Full and effective engagement with communities, business interests and key public bodies is critical and must be more effectively targeted. Among the options are a statutory duty for key public agencies to engage in the development plan process and the introduction of neighbour notification for site-specific proposals in local development plans.
The second theme is content. We want shorter plans that are focused on genuine planning and development issues, with greater consistency throughout Scotland in the style of plans. The third theme is management. Staff and resources must be managed effectively from the outset of plan preparation. That requires political commitment, effective leadership and a project management approach. The final theme is delivery. Development plans must focus more on outcomes, with action plans setting out the steps required to deliver the plans' aims.
Some proposals will require legislative change, but, for the most part, modernising the development planning system need not necessarily require changes to statutory procedures—it is about better management of the process. Our aim is to change the culture of development planning to one that is managed effectively from the outset, where there is greater consensus on the nature and scale of change and where proper, rigorous community consultation and delivery are key. Statutory development plans matter. They can and must make a difference. It is essential that all key stakeholders play their part.
We all know that the subject of rights of appeal in planning is controversial. Applicants have a right of appeal to the Scottish ministers against a refusal of planning permission or against the conditions attached to a consent. "Third party" is the term that is generally applied to anyone other than an applicant or planning authority. Third parties have many opportunities to participate in planning policy and decision making, but they do not have a right of appeal if they disagree with a local authority's decision. Some people see that as an imbalance in the planning system. Others consider that members of the public have plenty of opportunities to influence planning and that extending the right to appeal might cause significant and unnecessary delay.
"Your place, your plan: A White Paper on Public Involvement in Planning", which was published a year ago, set out our proposals to strengthen public involvement in the planning system. It included a commitment to consult on third-party planning appeals. The paper recognised that the matter is complex and has potentially significant implications for the planning system. The partnership agreement further defined the subject of the consultation. It stated:
"We will consult on new rights of appeal in planning cases where the local authority involved has an interest, where the application is contrary to the local plan, when planning officers have recommended rejection or where an Environmental Impact Assessment is needed."
I emphasise that the consultation that we are launching today takes a neutral standpoint. "Rights of Appeal in Planning" seeks views on whether we should introduce new rights of appeal. If we do not, are there other ways in which to address the concerns that lie behind demands for third-party appeals? If we do, how might we best design the appeal system?
One of our options is to make no change to the right of appeal. We do not want imbalance in the planning system, but it is in no one's interest to have a planning system that does not support growth or provide necessary development such as housing. We know that we shall have to make a hard decision and we shall not shirk that responsibility.
The consultation paper on rights of appeal sets out four possible ways forward, but it does not recommend a specific proposal and we will listen to the views that we receive. The first model that we are consulting on involves a right of appeal for third parties in the circumstances set out in the partnership agreement. Secondly, at the other end of the spectrum, we might not introduce further rights of appeal. However, that would not mean that there would be no change in the planning system; we would still intend to advance our existing programme of reform to tackle the issues that underlie the current calls for third-party appeal. A third possibility is to improve procedures in local authorities for dealing with controversial planning applications without altering the right of appeal. The final model sets out a new system for planning appeals that differs from the current process and involves some related changes to the planning system.
I know and understand that there are passionately held views both for and against a third-party right of appeal. We worked with a stakeholder group that was drawn from a wide range of interests to ensure that we explored those points of view. Some people believe that the issue of a third-party right of appeal is straightforward and that, quite simply, there should be such a right or that, quite simply, there should not. The issues and potential implications are aired in the paper.
The debate is important and it is essential that stakeholders engage in the process. The outcome of the consultation is far from being a foregone conclusion. We want people to respond to us, to inform our final decision; we want them to ensure that the decision that we take is informed and consistent and meets the needs of Scotland in terms of economic growth and social justice.
The third and equally important publication that we are issuing today is the "National Planning Framework for Scotland". We announced the decision to draw up the framework as one of our conclusions on the review of strategic planning. There has been extensive stakeholder engagement in drawing up the framework. We held a range of seminars across Scotland and I am pleased that there was strong support for tackling issues such as economic development, transport, water and drainage, affordable housing and waste.
The national planning framework is a key element in our package of planning reforms and it represents an important first step in addressing the challenges of Scotland's long-term development. The framework examines how Scotland is likely to change over the next 15 to 20 years, analyses the underlying trends in Scotland's development and the key drivers of change, and links with other key Executive policies on economic development and regeneration. The framework will help to guide the spatial development of Scotland and will provide a context for development plans and planning decisions. We plan to update it every four years.
The framework considers key points, such as the challenges and opportunities of Scotland's location and the importance of the Edinburgh-Glasgow relationship. It identifies the east coast as a key strategic corridor and it emphasises Ayrshire—where Prestwick airport and Hunterston play such an important role—and, of course, the key role that rural Scotland plays in our development. The framework is a planning document and will feed into the strategic projects review on transport and into decisions on area regeneration and priorities for expenditure on water and drainage.
In conclusion, the consultation papers, "Making Development Plans Deliver" and "Rights of Appeal in Planning", will be out for consultation during the next four months. The consultation will be a very active process. My deputy Mary Mulligan, officials and I will take the debate to our stakeholders in business and property, in environmental and community groups and in professional organisations. The Deputy First Minister will also continue his dialogue with business and planning will be on his agenda.
It is important to remember that other issues are being taken forward in relation to the planning reform agenda, including e-planning, design and the modernisation of our planning inquiry system. The Barker review of housing supply, our review of affordable housing and the implications of those reviews for the future of housing in Scotland are factors that we will consider in our reform of the planning system.
We are undertaking a large programme of important work and, to assist stakeholders, I will bring our final proposals together in a single document, which will identify elements that require primary legislation, elements that require secondary legislation and elements that can be dealt with through guidance.
The planning system deals with wide and complex issues, but we are determined that it should be modernised to meet the challenges of 21st century Scotland and to balance the needs of community and business. Today represents another stage in our reform of Scotland's planning system.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Murray Tosh):
Con
The first item of business is a statement by Margaret Curran on modernising and reforming Scotland's planning system. The minister will take questions at the...
The Minister for Communities (Ms Margaret Curran):
Lab
I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak to Parliament about our plans for modernising the planning system. Today, I am publishing two consultation pape...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
The minister will now take questions on her statement. I have a long—and lengthening—list of names on my screen, so I ask members to be very tight indeed wit...
Shona Robison (Dundee East) (SNP):
SNP
I thank the minister for the advance copy of her statement. I know that the Executive is keen on producing documents and, in particular, on consultations, bu...
Ms Curran:
Lab
I am delighted that so many members are taking an interest in planning and, in the interests of consensus, I say that Shona Robison has asked a key set of qu...
Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con):
Con
I, too, welcome the minister's statement, the national planning framework and the two consultation papers. As the real Opposition party, the Conservatives wi...
Ms Curran:
Lab
It will be very tedious if I compliment all the Opposition speakers on the points that they raise. Indeed, that is completely outwith my character, but I am ...
Donald Gorrie (Central Scotland) (LD):
LD
The minister need not congratulate me.The main thrust of the Liberal Democrats' concern about planning is that we should create a system that has enough well...
Ms Curran:
Lab
Donald Gorrie is particularly reasonable today and I must congratulate him on that. His point about staff is significant and we must give great consideration...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
The minister leaves me no choice but to call Sarah Boyack.
Sarah Boyack (Edinburgh Central) (Lab):
Lab
That is a bit of a poisoned chalice.I welcome the minister's statement and the various documents that have been issued this morning, which represent a big st...
Ms Curran:
Lab
I agree that we will have to give serious attention to how the system is staffed and supported. I may well discuss that with Sarah Boyack again, because it w...
Eleanor Scott (Highlands and Islands) (Green):
Green
The partnership agreement says that the Executive"will consult on new rights of appeal in planning cases".However, it seems to me that only one of the four o...
Ms Curran:
Lab
When Eleanor Scott reads the consultation documents, she will see that such issues are addressed. I would not want to suggest that we are limiting the consul...
Jackie Baillie (Dumbarton) (Lab):
Lab
I, too, welcome the minister's statement, the consultation on third-party rights of appeal and the national planning framework. I want to deal with the princ...
Ms Curran:
Lab
Yes, that is part of the answer to some of the issues that we face. I have spoken about earlier and more targeted engagement with communities and stakeholder...
Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP):
SNP
I congratulate the minister on responding so promptly to target 7 in the communities section of the "Annual Evaluation Report 2005-06", which says:"In 2004, ...
Ms Curran:
Lab
We intend the consultation to last four months. Obviously, we will then review the outcome of the consultation. I will be happy to explain the details of tha...
Karen Whitefield (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab):
Lab
Does the minister agree that we must have a system that guarantees that local plans are updated regularly and in genuine consultation with communities? Does ...
Ms Curran:
Lab
I have listened intently to Karen Whitefield's points on the planning system over recent months. There is a lot in what she says. We have to get local plans ...
Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con):
Con
I welcome the minister's references to the centrality of economic growth. She will be aware that business organisations are concerned about the third-party r...
Ms Curran:
Lab
I feel like I have arrived on another planet: I agree with Murdo Fraser.
Alex Johnstone (North East Scotland) (Con):
Con
Steady on.
Ms Curran:
Lab
I know—I will be agreeing with Mike Rumbles before I know what I am doing. That was too much—I apologise to Mike Rumbles.Murdo Fraser is absolutely right, an...
Ms Wendy Alexander (Paisley North) (Lab):
Lab
I hope that the minister will agree that it is a discourtesy to Parliament and to back benchers in particular that the national planning framework, the two c...
Ms Curran:
Lab
I apologise. I am sure that Wendy Alexander, of all people, knows that there are procedures to ensure that such things are done. I assumed that those procedu...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
I am sure that members will appreciate that.
Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD):
LD
I warmly welcome the statement on the review of the planning system, especially the focus on social housing. I hope that the minister will be considering rur...
Ms Curran:
Lab
I assure the member that there will be full and proper engagement with business on the range and complexity of the issues that we are addressing. We will eng...
Rhona Brankin (Midlothian) (Lab):
Lab
I welcome the statement and recognise the importance of strategic planning at the city-region level. Can the minister assure me that the mechanisms for deliv...