COM/S2/06/22/A

COMMUNITIES COMMITTEE

AGENDA

22nd Meeting, 2006 (Session 2)

Wednesday 6 September 2006

The Committee will meet at 9.30 am in Committee Room 4.

1. Planning etc. (Scotland) Bill: The Committee will take evidence on National Scenic Areas from Rhona Brankin MSP, Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development.

2. Planning etc. (Scotland) Bill: The Committee will take evidence on Local Authority interest cases from Johann Lamont MSP, Deputy Minister for Communities.

3. Subordinate legislation: Johann Lamont MSP, Deputy Minister for Communities, to move the following motion—

S2M-4583 – That the Communities Committee recommends that the draft Automated Registration of Title to Land (Electronic Communications) (Scotland) Order 2006 be approved.

4. Subordinate legislation: The Committee will consider the following negative instrument—

the Town and Country Planning (Application of Subordinate Legislation to the Crown) (Inquiries Procedure) (Scotland) Order 2006, (SSI 2006/339).

Steve Farrell Clerk to the Committee Tel. 0131 348 5211 email: [email protected]

COM/S2/06/22/A

***********************

The following papers relate to the meeting:

Agenda Item 1

Briefing Paper (Private) COM/S2/06/22/1(P) Scottish Executive Note COM/S2/06/22/2 SPICe Briefing (Private) COM/S2/06/22/3(P) SPICe Briefing COM/S2/06/22/4

Agenda Item 2

Briefing Paper (Private) COM/S2/06/22/5(P) Scottish Executive Note COM/S2/06/22/6

Agenda Item 3

Note by the Clerk (SSI attached) COM/S2/06/22/7

Agenda Item 4

Note by the Clerk (SSI attached) COM/S2/06/22/8

COM/S2/06/22/2

COMMUNITIES COMMITTEE

22nd Meeting, 2006 (Session 2)

Wednesday 6 September 2006

Planning etc. (Scotland) Bill – National Scenic Areas

Scottish Executive Note and Draft Amendment

1. Ministers currently do not have a statutory power to designate areas of land as having scenic value which requires special protection. It is now intended to bring forward new measures to provide for this. The attached draft amendment provides a power to the Scottish Ministers to designate areas as National Scenic Areas, or to amend or revoke them. It also requires planning authorities to pay special attention to the desirability of safeguarding or enhancing the character or appearance of areas so designated when exercising functions under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 in relation to land in those areas.

Background

2. National Scenic Areas (NSAs) are areas of Scotland which are nationally important in terms of their scenic qualities. There are 40 NSAs mainly in the more remote and mountainous areas of Scotland all of which were originally identified in 1978 by the Countryside Commission for Scotland (CCS) in its publication “Scotland’s Scenic Heritage”. They are an accolade designation based on an aesthetic appreciation of “outstanding natural beauty and amenity”, and represent Scotland’s finest landscapes.

3. At present the NSA designation is in a stagnant situation because no powers exist to either review or change existing NSAs, nor to consider new NSA designations. The powers to do so were repealed in 1991 when National Heritage Areas were introduced1. No NHAs were designated and the power to designate such areas were repealed by the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004.

Detail of Amendment

4. The amendment provides the Scottish Ministers with power to designate NSAs by direction (sub-section (1)), and to vary or revoke such designations by subsequent direction (sub-section (5)). Before designating an area the Scottish Ministers must consider that the area is of outstanding scenic value in a national context and that special protection measures are appropriate (sub-section (1)). In their consideration of the scenic value of an area Scottish Ministers may have regard to its natural beauty and amenity (sub-section (4)).

1 Power to designate new NSAs under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1972 were repealed on the introduction of measures in the Natural Heritage (Scotland) Act 1991, to designate National Heritage Areas, which were themselves subsequently repealed. The current position is limited to designations existing as at 1 April 1992 which are preserved and can be cancelled. This produced a legislative anomaly by removing any statutory provisions for NSAs which would enable NSAs to be designated, or amendments to be made to existing designations.

COM/S2/06/22/2

5. Ministers must consult Scottish Natural Heritage prior to designating a NSA, or varying or cancelling a designation (sub-section (6)). Ministers may also make regulations specifying additional consultees (sub-section (6)). Ministers may also make regulations specifying the form of directions (the text/content); how the NSAs will be described in the direction (e.g. by reference to maps); publicity for directions; and other procedural matters (e.g. other consultation requirements, local availability of maps of NSAs for inspection etc) (sub-section (9)). Flexibility is also provided for such regulations to make different provision for different purposes (sub-section (10)).

6. There is a requirement for planning authorities to pay special attention to the desirability of safeguarding or enhancing the character or appearance of areas so designated when exercising functions under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 in relation to them. The Scottish Ministers have power to issue guidance (sub-section (3)) to planning authorities in relation to the provisions as a whole and in particular the requirements of sub-section (2) which they must have regard to. The Scottish Ministers are required to make available for inspection a list of NSAs (sub-section (7)) which may be in electronic form (sub-section (8)).

Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs Department Landscapes and Habitats Division August 2006

COM/S2/06/22/2

DRAFT EXECUTIVE AMENDMENT

SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT BILL AMENDMENT

ID Number:

Name of Proposer: Malcolm Chisholm

Before section 47, insert—

COM/S2/06/22/2

(7) The Scottish Ministers are to compile and make available for inspection free of charge a list containing particulars of any area which has been designated as a National Scenic Area. (8) For the purposes of subsection (7), a list may be made available by electronic means. (9) The Scottish Ministers may by regulations make provision as to— (a) the form of any direction under subsection (1) or (5), (b) the manner in which a National Scenic Area is to be described in such a direction, (c) the publicity to be given to any such direction, and (d) other procedural matters in connection with the making of such a direction. (10) Regulations under this section may make different provision for different purposes. ”.>

COM/S2/06/22/4

SPICe NATIONAL SCENIC AREAS briefing

GRAEME COOK 2 June 2006

National Scenic Areas (NSAs) are Scotland’s national landscape 06/47 designation. The Scottish Executive proposes to introduce amendments to the Planning etc. (Scotland) Bill in relation to the designation, statutory purpose and management of NSAs. This briefing outlines the history of NSAs, shows where they are situated, and reflects views on the Scottish Executive proposals.

Figure 1 - Eildon Hills from Scott's view

Scottish Parliament Information Centre (SPICe) Briefings are compiled for the benefit of the Members of the Parliament and their personal staff. Authors are available to discuss the contents of these papers with MSPs and their staff who should contact Graeme Cook on extension 85086 or email [email protected] Members of the public or external organisations may comment on this briefing by emailing us at [email protected]. However, researchers are unable to enter into personal discussion in relation to SPICe Briefing Papers. If you have any general questions about the work of the Parliament you can email the Parliament’s Public Information Service at [email protected].

Every effort is made to ensure that the information contained in SPICe briefings is correct at the time of publication. Readers should be aware however that briefings are not necessarily updated or otherwise amended to reflect subsequent changes. www.scottish.parliament.uk providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 1 CONTENTS

KEY POINTS ...... 3

BACKGROUND...... 4

LANDSCAPE...... 4

NATIONAL SCENIC AREAS – HISTORY AND LOCATION ...... 6

SNH ADVICE TO GOVERNMENT IN 1999 AND SUBSEQUENT DEVELOPMENTS...... 10 Land management contracts and the Scottish Forestry Strategy...... 11 Pilot projects...... 12 SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE PROPOSALS ...... 12

COMPARISON OF SNH ADVICE AND SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE PROPOSALS ...... 13

OTHER VIEWS ON THE SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE PROPOSALS ...... 16 The proposals in general...... 17 The basis of designation ...... 18 A New Statutory Purpose for NSAs ...... 19 Designation of NSAs ...... 20 NSAs and National Parks...... 21 Management Strategies...... 21 ENGLAND AND WALES - AREAS OF OUTSTANDING NATURAL BEAUTY ...... 23

SOURCES ...... 24

Acknowledgements All photos courtesy of Scottish Natural Heritage

providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 2 COM/S2/06/19/2 KEY POINTS

NSAs

• Debate on Scotland’s landscape and NSAs is increasingly seen as relevant to a range of other agendas – economic and rural development, health and community well being, access and cultural heritage • The UK is now a signatory to the 2000 European Landscape Convention • National Scenic Areas (NSAs) are Scotland’s only national landscape designation and are seen as an ‘accolade’ designation. There are 40 NSAs covering 12.7% of Scotland • There are other local landscape designations • NSAs were formally developed during the 1970s but the origins of landscape designations go back much further • SNH provided advice on NSA reform to Ministers in 1999 and it is generally agreed the NSA designation still needs modernised • New Scottish Executive proposals seek to re-establish the statutory base for NSAs • There is general agreement over the broad focus of the proposals, however it is recognised there must be better linkup with other policy areas e.g. agriculture & forestry • The statutory purpose of the NSA aims to include reference to “the social and economic needs of communities”. Some feel this unnecessary, some feel there should be reference to “the nation” and others feel primacy should be given to the landscape interest (reflecting the so called ‘Sandford principle’) • The proposals are that encouragement should be given for Management Strategies to be developed for each NSA, written by the relevant local authorities. There is scepticism as to whether a voluntary approach can deliver in the timeframes the Executive anticipate • Dumfries & Galloway, and Highland, Councils have, in partnership with SNH developed pilot NSA Management Strategies • There is debate as to how NSAs and landscape policy more generally should relate to National Parks • There is some consensus that the current suite of NSAs should be suitably protected before consideration is given to new NSAs • Suitable ongoing funding from central government is considered an imperative • The national landscape designation in England and Wales is Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). All AONBs were required to have published a management plan by 2004.

CONSULTATION AND LEGISLATIVE PROCESS

• There is some concern that the proposals have been rushed into the legislative process. The Scottish Executive made no reference to NSAs in the 2005 Planning White Paper • However the general view is that the proposals should still continue • There has been concern over whether a Planning Bill, which for the most part stops at the low water mark, is the most appropriate vehicle for legislation which covers marine areas as well as land • The Planning Bill is limited to planning and development matters and does not cover some land management issues • The introduction of Stage 2 amendments means views on NSAs were not explicitly considered during Stage 1 evidence taking • The Scottish Executive is reviewing permitted developments – that is development which can go ahead without going through the formal planning process – and is also set to review planning guidance on Natural Heritage. providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 3 COM/S2/06/19/2 BACKGROUND National Scenic Areas (NSAs) are Scotland’s national landscape designation, and are designated in areas considered to be of national importance for their scenic qualities. There are 40 NSAs in Scotland, covering a total area of 1,001,800 ha.

The Scottish Executive (2006a) has proposed some changes to NSAs, and will seek to introduce these by way of amending the Planning etc (Scotland) Bill at Stage 2. It is also understood that the Scottish Executive is considering reviewing NPPG 14 on Natural Heritage (Scottish Executive 1999). The Executive also suggests that its proposals would stimulate a “wider debate on landscape issues and the kinds of landscape which we want” (Scottish Executive 2006a).

LANDSCAPE Beauty is said to be in the eye of the beholder, but there tends to be an element of collective recognition of the value of certain types of landscapes. In a diverse country such as Scotland, such recognition can be represented by a broad spectrum of landscape, including mountains, coastlines, sea and freshwater lochs, rivers, woodlands and moorlands. NSAs cover this diversity of landscape.

The National Trust for Scotland (2006) is of the view that “scenic quality’ relates to landscapes which are more than simply attractive but are characterised by, for example, visual drama, fine visual composition and a sense of the spectacular..”.

There is interest in considering whether the quality of a landscape should reflect the fabric of that landscape i.e. just the physical features which make it up; or should there also be consideration given to the values which are held in relation to a landscape, sometimes described as ‘special qualities’. These could, for example, relate to the types of activities carried out on the land. A landscape could therefore be managed for special qualities which may not always be consistent with its scenic quality.

The Scottish Executive’s National Planning Framework (2004) describes Scotland’s landscapes as a “national treasure”. Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) develops this, saying (Scottish Natural Heritage 2006):

“Yet in two sharply contrasting respects it [the National Planning Framework statement] tells less than the whole story. On the one hand the surroundings in which many Scots pass their daily lives fall far short of the standards set by these iconic landscapes. And on the other few Scots fully appreciate the remarkable variety of high-quality landscapes that the country possesses, which extend far beyond those that feature most regularly in the guide books and calendars”.

The SNH view may seem to judge the public a little harshly, but they further argue that this lack of recognition has been reflected in public policy surrounding landscape, hence the need for a change in the way landscape policy is considered post devolution. SNH says that:

“One topic deserving greater attention is how best to identify and articulate landscape objectives, so that their attainment can become a specific consideration in the operation of the many mechanisms by which society encourages and regulates change”

There is a developing recognition that whilst landscapes are dynamic, they shouldn’t change simply as an incidental consequence of other decisions but their well-being should be a more providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 4 COM/S2/06/19/2 explicit factor (from speech by Lady Isobel Glasgow, Sustainable Landscapes conference 2006). Whilst this is a laudable concept, the practicalities of, for instance, local authority boundaries, or historical forestry policy in areas of landscape value mean that there is a requirement for a cohesive sense of purpose around landscape and its protection.

There is a blurred line too as to when a landscape is considered of great national or great local significance. In addition, it has to be understood that a slight change to the angle can render a view completely different. Consider the Queen’s View on Loch Tummel. Whilst it is grand from an elevated position, might the same evocative reaction be had from the lochside? Indeed, might the view be considered of less value were it not named Queen’s View?

There are many aspects to bear in mind when considering what makes up a landscape. It may be that some landscapes are worthy because they have no visible signs of human dwelling or activity, even though they may have been shaped by human activity in the past. On the other hand, such as at Castle Tioram, or Skara Brae on Orkney, human dwelling, albeit historic, is integral, and the views at somewhere such as Pitlochry are undoubtedly enhanced by Loch Faskally – a man-made reservoir.

Some of these issues have been under consideration at a European level for some time, and on 21 February 2006 the United Kingdom Government signed the Council of Europe European Landscape Convention. The Convention has a concern with all landscapes – the outstanding as well as the everyday or degraded. The Convention has not yet been ratified by the UK.

NSAs, as will be discussed later, are the national landscape designation, but there are also local landscape designations. It is for local authorities to consider how these are named (for instance Area of Great Landscape Value), though SNH/Historic Scotland Guidance (SNH and Historic Scotland 2005) encourages the use of “Special Landscape Area (SLA)” as an appropriate designation which would reduce confusion over different name types. General information on protected areas can be found in SPICe Briefing 05-08 Protected Areas (Reid 2005).

The guidance has been published to assist local authorities in their broader approach to landscape design; however it also discusses many of the intangible aesthetic theories that abound in relation to the definitions and designations of landscape.

SNH is proposing to establish a Scottish Landscape Forum with the purpose of facilitating discussion, preparing advice and promoting action for the better care of landscape. This will comprise the main agencies and representative organisations that have specific responsibilities towards the landscape or which have a strong hand in shaping it (SNH 2006c).

providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 5 COM/S2/06/19/2 Figure 2 - The Trotternish ridge near Staffin, Isle of Skye

NATIONAL SCENIC AREAS – HISTORY AND LOCATION In their submission to the Scottish Executive consultation, The National Trust for Scotland states that (National Trust for Scotland 2006)

“whilst the NSA designation indeed had its origins in A Park System for Scotland (CCS 1974), the origins of landscape designations in Scotland go back much further, for example to the five National Park Direction Areas established in 1951 and to the Highland Landscape survey (Murray 1962) commissioned by The National Trust for Scotland”

In 1978 Scotland’s Scenic Heritage was published, detailing 40 areas identified as being of “unsurpassed attractiveness which must be conserved as part of our national heritage” (as elaborated in SNH 2000). The 40 areas were identified on the basis of “aesthetics and preference rather than an analytical review of the components of landscape” (Scottish Executive 2006a).

The National Scenic Area designation was formally introduced through Scottish Development Department Circular 20/1980, Development control in NSAs. The Circular:

• required local authorities to have policies in their development plans to protect NSAs • restricted some permitted development rights in NSAs and required consultation with Countryside Commission for Scotland (now SNH) on certain defined developments

Further directions were made under the Town and Country Planning (General Development) (Scotland) Order 1975. These:

providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 6 COM/S2/06/19/2 • set out procedures for reference to the Secretary of State of planning applications for specified categories of development • removed certain permitted development rights in NSAs

The Scottish Executive is currently undertaking a review of permitted developments. The Communities Committee heard evidence (Scottish Parliament 2006a) during its consideration at Stage 1 of the Planning etc. (Scotland) Bill that the Scottish Executive:

“will consult on what should be removed from and what should be added to planning control and we will publish our research on the review of permitted development.”

And

“There should be fewer appeals because the review of permitted development should lead to fewer small-scale developments.”

National Planning Policy Guideline (NPPG) 14 Natural Heritage was published in 1999 and gave further protection to NSAs, including a policy test for development affecting a designated area of national importance. NPPG 14 states:

Development which would affect a designated area of national importance should only be permitted where:

• the objectives of designation and the overall integrity of the area will not be compromised; or • any significant adverse effects on the qualities for which the area has been designated are clearly outweighed by social or economic benefits of national importance.

NPPG 14 further requires planning authorities to ensure development does not detract from the landscape, and that proposals are of a high standard. NPPG 14 is expected to be reviewed shortly.

The following two pages detail in map and table format the extent and location of NSAs in Scotland.

providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 7 COM/S2/06/19/2

Figure 3 – National Scenic Areas - Map

Shetland (7 parts)

Hoy & West Mainland

NW Sutherland Kyle of Tongue

South Uist, Harris & North Uist Assynt-Coigach Dornoch Firth St Kilda Trotternish Wester Ross

Glen Strathfarrar South Uist Kintail machair The Cairngorm The Cuillin Glen Affric Mountains Hills Knoydart Deeside & The Small Lochnagar Isles Ben Nevis & Loch Shiel Glencoe Morar, Moidart & Ardnamurchan Loch Rannoch & Glen Lyon Lynn of Loch Tummel Lorn R.Tay (Dunkeld) Loch na Keall Loch Lomond R. Earn (Comrie to St Fillans) e Scarba, Lunga & the Garvellachs al pd na The Trossachs K Kyles of Bute

Jura

North Upper Tweeddale Arran Eildon & Leaderfoot

Fleet Valley Nith Estuary East Stewartry Coast

Source: Scottish Natural Heritage (2006c)

providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 8 COM/S2/06/19/2 Figure 4 – National Scenic Areas – List

Location Local authority Area (hectares)1 Assynt - Coigach Highland 90,200 Ben Nevis and Glen Coe Highland, Argyll and Bute, Perth and Kinross 101,600 Deeside and Lochnagar Aberdeenshire, Angus 40,000 Dornoch Firth Highland 7,500 East Stewartry Coast Dumfries and Galloway 4,500 Eildon and Leaderfoot Scottish Borders 3,600 Fleet Valley Dumfries and Galloway 5,300 Glen Affric Highland 19,300 Glen Strathfarrar Highland 3,800 Hoy and West Mainland Orkney Islands 14,800 Jura Argyll and Bute 21,800 Kintail Highland 15,500 Knapdale Argyll and Bute 19,800 Knoydart Highland 39,500 Kyle of Tongue Highland 18,500 Kyles of Bute Argyll and Bute 4,400 Loch Lomond Argyll and Bute, Stirling, West Dunbartonshire 27,400 Loch Na Keal, Isle of Mull Argyll and Bute 12,700 Loch Rannoch and Glen Lyon Perth and Kinross, Stirling 48,400 Loch Shiel Highland 13,400 Loch Tummel Perth and Kinross 9,200 Lynn of Lorn Argyll and Bute 4,800 Morar, Moidart and Highland 13,500 Ardnamurchan Nith Estuary Dumfries and Galloway 9,300 North Arran North Ayrshire 23,800 North-West Sutherland Highland 20,500 River Earn (Comrie to St. Perth and Kinross 3,000 Fillans) River Tay (Dunkeld) Perth and Kinross 5,600 Scarba, Lunga and the Argyll and Bute 1,900 Garvellachs Shetland Shetland Islands 11,600 South Lewis, Harris and North Western Isles 109,600 Uist South Uist Machair Western Isles 6,100 St. Kilda Western Isles 900 The Cairngorm Mountains Highland, Aberdeenshire, Moray 67,200 The Cuillin Hills Highland 21,900 The Small Isles Highland 15,500 The Trossachs Stirling 4,600 Trotternish Highland 5,000 Upper Tweeddale Scottish Borders 10,500 Wester Ross Highland 145,300 Source Scottish Natural Heritage and Scottish Executive (2006a)

1 Land Area (ha) to nearest 100 ha, excluding marine areas providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 9 COM/S2/06/19/2 SNH ADVICE TO GOVERNMENT IN 1999 AND SUBSEQUENT DEVELOPMENTS In September 1997 SNH were asked to review the NSA designation. They were asked:

• to consider the form of protection which a revitalised landscape designation should afford • to review the current selection of NSAs and advise on what changes might be desirable • to consider the relationship of the NSA with other designations, in particular National Parks and Areas of Great Landscape Value.

After a period of public consultation, SNH published their advice for Scottish Ministers in 1999 (Scottish Natural Heritage 1999). Main recommendations included:

• the priority for action should be to ensure that measures are put in place which enable the effective safeguarding and enhancement of the existing series of 40 NSAs before any systematic effort is made to identify potential new NSAs • the NSA designation should continue to be a scenic designation based on preferences for natural beauty and amenity, and that it should serve as an accolade designation but, if the series is to expand, it should be more comprehensive in its recognition of the diversity of Scotland’s best scenery than the present suite of 40 areas SNH further proposed:

• a new statutory base for NSAs, which defines their purpose • enhanced duties lying with local authorities in particular, but with a new responsibility on all public bodies and others to safeguard the NSA • a requirement for local authorities to produce, implement and review a Management Strategy • changes to some of the regulatory provisions under the Town & Country Planning system • the revision of mainstream land-management support schemes to ensure that they contribute to NSA objectives, and the provision of additional incentives for management in recognition of the national status of NSAs • clearer and fuller policy guidance issued by the Government and SNH • greater effort to increase awareness, understanding and responsibility for NSAs amongst the local communities within these areas, and by the general public.

SNH believed additional national funding was necessary to protect NSAs, and proposed to fund NSA officers for a period of time. If the suite of NSAs were to be increased, SNH believed a technical group should advise SNH with a final decision from the Scottish Executive or Scottish Parliament. Where NSAs and National Parks overlapped, SNH proposed that the NSA portion should be de-designated to avoid confusion. SNH believed that a regional or local level scenery designation was appropriate, used alongside landscape character assessments, to guide new development. (Landscape character assessment is a tool for identifying the features that give a locality a ‘sense of place’ and identifying what makes it different from surrounding areas [SNH & Countryside Agency 2002]). SNH further proposed there should be only one tier of sub-national scenery designation.

Scottish Environment LINK supported the 1999 SNH advice to government (Scottish Parliament 2006b).

providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 10 COM/S2/06/19/2

SNH, sometimes in partnership with other organisations, has continued to publish some key documents:

• SNH’s Natural Heritage Futures programme (2002a) which included a national assessment of Scotland’s landscape • SNH and the English Countryside Agency’s guidance (2002) on landscape character assessment • SNH’s analysis of landscape trends (2002b) • SNH’s discussion paper (2003) seeking to stimulate debate about the landscapes of the future • SNH and Historic Scotland’s Guidance on local landscape designations (2005)

The Scottish Agricultural College completed some work in 2005 on The Economic Valuation of Landscapes. This desk study and literature review examined what economic valuation methods were available. The Scottish Executive hopes to follow this up with a more in depth look at the value of landscape to different sectors. The Scottish Executive intends to take a paper on possible proposals to the new Scottish Landscape Forum (Scottish Executive 2006e).

Land management contracts and the Scottish Forestry Strategy Land Management Contracts (LMCs) are the key element of the Scottish Executive’s agricultural policy, and were first suggested in the 2001 Forward Strategy for Scottish Agriculture. Elements of LMCs can be used to support policy aims which are broader than simply agriculture – this could include managing components of the landscape.

The Scottish Executive has a research project ongoing with SNH examining landscape management guidance for land managers - this is aimed at producing a toolkit for land managers to use as part of the Land Management Contract work.

The Scottish Forestry Strategy, and the Scottish Forestry Grants Scheme are both under review. The revised draft Strategy (Forestry Commission Scotland 2006a) makes mention of landscape many times, though specifically mentions NSAs only with regard to development of an indicator, measuring the percentage of woodlands within designated areas which are covered by Forest Design Plans or Forest Plans.

The Grants Scheme consultation (Forestry Commission Scotland 2006b) only mentions landscape once, but does propose that small woodlands schemes would continue to require specific permission within NSAs.

In their response to the Scottish Executive consultation, The National Trust for Scotland (2006) summarise the position in this regard:

“There is widespread acceptance amongst land managers of the need to incorporate landscape objectives when planning agricultural and forestry change, and much accumulated experience as to how to do this well. However, consultation with relevant agencies (particularly local authorities and SNH) can be complex and slow, which can deter schemes with potential landscape benefits. Most of this is due to under-resourcing of agencies and resulting lack of staff time. If NSAs are to develop a reputation as an effective mechanism amongst land managers, local authorities and SNH must be given additional resources to ensure that this process can run smoothly and quickly.”

providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 11 COM/S2/06/19/2 Pilot projects As a follow-up to its advice SNH, in partnership with Dumfries and Galloway and Highland Council, has piloted the preparation of Management Strategies for four NSAs. Dumfries and Galloway Council is now implementing these strategies.

Figure 4 - Lochan beyond mountain track with Beinn Eighe in distance

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE PROPOSALS On 30 January 2006 the Scottish Executive (2006a) published a consultation paper on National Scenic Areas. The consultation closed on 24 April 2006, and the intention of the Executive is to introduce relevant amendments at Stage 2 of the Planning etc. (Scotland) Bill. This approach has been widely trailed and so the issues have had only a little discussion in the Communities Committee. On 9 March 2006 a seminar (Scottish Natural Heritage 2006b) discussing the Executive’s proposals was held at the SNH offices at Battleby.

This briefing does not propose to repeat what the Executive consultation states. Instead it reflects some views on the proposals, in particular the SNH view.

The table below compares what the Scottish Executive are proposing against the advice they were given by SNH in 1999. It further gives SNH’s view on the Executive proposals.

providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 12 COM/S2/06/19/2 COMPARISON OF SNH ADVICE AND SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE PROPOSALS SNH ADVICE SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE SNH VIEW ON PROPOSALS PROPOSALS Basis of designation NSA designation should continue to be NSA should continue to be a Support intention that a scenic designation based on scenic designation based on designation should remain a preferences for natural beauty and preferences for natural beauty scenic one, based on amenity, and that it should serve as an and amenity, but recognising preferences for natural beauty accolade designation but, if the series this may encompass other and amenity, but with a clearer is to expand, it should be more values. NSAs should remain recognition of the range of comprehensive in its recognition of the an accolade designation rather other values people find in diversity of Scotland’s best scenery than seeking to represent all these landscapes, including than the present suite of 40 areas Scottish landscapes cultural, historic and recreational. Need to clarify whether adjacent sea areas are encompassed within NSAs (for many NSAs the interplay of lands and sea is an essential part of their character) A new statutory base for NSAs A new statutory base for NSAs, which Proposed definition of purpose Consider aim achieves defines their purpose is “that NSAs are areas of land balance of safeguarding which represent the very best landscape but not to exclusion of the landscapes for which of other concerns, in particular Scotland is renowned” and socio-economic needs. But “they are of such outstanding should indicate that where scenic beauty and amenity that irresolvable conflict arises they should be safeguarded primacy should be given to and enhanced as part of the NSA interest (reflecting the so- national heritage”. The aims of called Sandford principle) the designation are “to manage changes arising from development and other pressures on the special qualities of the NSA consistent with the underlying purpose, whilst recognising the social and economic needs of communities” Enhanced duties lying with local No new responsibility on all Requirement for planning authorities in particular, but with a new public bodies and others to authorities to have regard to responsibility on all public bodies and safeguard the NSA, though the NSA is too weak. Specifically: others to safeguard the NSA general duty (s66 Countryside • concern that consideration (Scotland) Act 1967) on only to planning government and public bodies applications within NSA to have regard to the • requirement restricted to desirability of conserving the planning applications, not natural beauty and amenity of development plans the countryside will continue to • decisions of many public apply bodies not just planning authorities can have impact. Planning Bill restrictive, but duties should still be extended • for planning authorities ‘to have regard to’ NSAs is feeble and of limited effect. See a need for a refreshed

providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 13 COM/S2/06/19/2 landscape duty, applying to all public bodies, comparable to the biodiversity duty introduced under the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 Changes to some of the regulatory A review of the General Substantive comment on provisions under the Town & Country Permitted Development Order permitted development only on Planning system (GPDO) is underway the issue around where NSAs and National Parks overlap Designation of NSAs Ensure that measures are put in place New statutory provisions to SNH endorse re-establishment which enable the effective underpin the designation, of a statutory base, and remain safeguarding and enhancement of the accompanied by a voluntary convinced that their 1999 existing series of 40 NSAs before any approach to Management advice was right, but believe systematic effort is made to identify Strategies. Unclear whether further consideration could potential new NSAs the proposals will give usefully be given to the immediate statutory process by which potential new confirmation to the existing NSAs might be identified as of NSAs national importance The search and selection for any new SNH and local authorities Whilst recognising important areas should be led by a technical should have the power to contribution of local authorities, group, whose role will be to advise consider and bring forward question whether it is SNH. New NSAs should be validated proposals for new NSAs. Final appropriate they have a power through the Scottish Executive or power to designate rests with similar to SNH’s in the process Parliament Scottish Ministers. of national designations NSAs and National Parks Within any National Parks, NSAs The continuation or otherwise NSAs should be removed from should be de-designated to reduce the of overlapping designations within National Parks once potential confusion and complexity of should be considered on an adequate safeguards through overlapping designations. However, individual basis as NSA the National Park Plan and consider that such former NSAs should boundaries are reviewed. Local Plan are in place, and still be regarded as representing part of NSAs and National Parks have existing restrictions on the best of Scotland’s scenery, and this different purposes, and it permitted development must be recognised in the safeguards should be remembered that retained (suggest current and measures applying to them. Like NSAs give greater protection in restrictions could be extended National Parks, NSAs should be some policy areas than across Park area). Wish to considered as a natural heritage national Park status does. The avoid need for a separate NSA designation of the highest national Review of the GPDO will Management Strategy within standing inform the debate National Park Management Strategies A requirement for local authorities to Local authorities and national Still believe statutory basis produce, implement and review a park authorities where required, though understands Management Strategy for each NSA appropriate should be that Executive view is that a encouraged to prepare a Planning Bill does not give Management Strategy for each scope to introduce such NSA. This would not be a powers. Remain sceptical statutory requirement, however about whether discretionary the aim would be to have a approach will deliver. At least Strategy in place for each NSA would require intention to within five years legislate if voluntary approach does not work Revision of mainstream land- Not for NSA legislation to Applaud recognition under management support schemes to address but Executive say Land Management Contracts, ensure that they contribute to NSA there is scope for “for Land but highlight need for proper objectives, and the provision of Management Contracts and resourcing additional incentives for management the Scottish Forestry Grant in recognition of the national status of Scheme to NSAs recognise and support the interests of NSAs”

providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 14 COM/S2/06/19/2 Clearer and fuller policy guidance Will ask SNH to draw up Welcome these proposals, issued by the Government and SNH further guidance on the including the role for development of Management VisitScotland and Historic Strategies and to report to Scotland, and consider there Ministers annually on progress are a number of other public with preparation and bodies which have a vital role, implementation. VisitScotland not least the Enterprise and Historic Scotland also to networks be involved Greater effort to increase awareness, No specific proposals Still believe “it is important to understanding and responsibility for ensure that SNH maintains NSAs amongst the local communities national oversight of the within these areas, and by the general designation, that local public authorities reflect local community views and that non- governmental organisations have an opportunity to represent relevant resident and non-resident stakeholders, notably land management, recreational, tourism and environmental interests” Additional national funding should be Grants are available from SNH New Executive funding will be provided in recognition of the national for preparation of Management required for SNH to support interest in the protection of NSAs. SNH Strategies, including for Project developing Management proposes to fund the preparation of Officer recruitment Strategies. This is based on Management Strategies, mainly pilot scheme experiences. through the employment of NSA Important that level of officers on a time-limited basis. New resourcing under Land sources of funding should be identified Management Contracts is to supplement existing expenditure in sufficient each area on land management support Sources: Scottish Natural Heritage (1999), Scottish Executive (2006a), Scottish Natural Heritage (2006a)

Scottish Natural heritage are further of the view that the target of having all NSA strategies in place by 2010 is over ambitious.

providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 15 COM/S2/06/19/2 Figure 5 – Sea cliffs, Hermaness, Uist

OTHER VIEWS ON THE SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE PROPOSALS Because NSAs were not originally contained in the Planning etc. (Scotland) Bill the Communities Committee has to date received little formal evidence on the proposals. Scottish Executive officials made no reference to NSAs when giving oral evidence on 11 January 2006 (Scottish Parliament Communities Committee 2006a).

Scottish Natural Heritage did make oral reference to NSAs stating (Scottish Parliament Communities Committee 2006b):

On Monday, the Executive issued the consultation paper, "Enhancing Our Care of Scotland's Landscapes"—I am sure that the committee is aware of it. The paper makes proposals for future use of national scenic area designation and suggests that, if agreement is reached on the provisions that need to be made to refresh NSA designation, they should be included in the planning bill by way of amendments at Stage 2. I do not want to miss the opportunity to say that SNH would welcome such amendments and that we hope that the proposal finds favour with the committee and Parliament.

On 8 February 2006, evidence from Scottish Environment LINK (Scottish Parliament Communities Committee 2006b) expressed continued support for the proposals, but disappointment in the consultation and scrutiny process:

It has been a long-standing ambition of Scottish Environment LINK to strengthen provisions on National Scenic Areas and we welcome the consultation. It is worth reminding the committee that Scottish Natural Heritage gave evidence on NSAs to the Scottish Executive as far back as 1999. We are now faced with some difficulties. The providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 16 COM/S2/06/19/2 consultation on NSAs has only just been launched, whereas we had hoped that they would be covered in last year's white paper. That would have allowed us to contribute balanced views to the scrutiny of the bill's proposals for NSAs. There are concerns about process and procedure. Who is to say what will come out of the consultation and what might be introduced at stage 2? There will not be the same scrutiny of later provisions as of already existing provisions. We hope that more parliamentary time will be devoted to the matter once there has been a full response to the consultation.

On the theme of the consultation, Scottish and Southern Energy (2006) feels that the terminology in the document is confusing, with many terms such as “safeguarding, protect, manage change, care and conserve.. all used without definition”.

The proposals in general There is broad consensus that NSAs are no longer fit for purpose and that the proposals to designate, de-designate or revise the boundaries of any NSA are appropriate. Some argue that the designation is far too low profile. For example Wildlife Expeditions (2006) based on Mull argue that “very few people on Mull …know that we have an NSA” and that the designation had huge potential to aid rural development. Wildlife Expeditions further point out that better working between SNH and VisitScotland might be appropriate for NSAs. RTPI Scotland (2006) echoes this – whilst it supports the statutory purpose and powers for Scottish Ministers, it states:

the current proposals as set out…will need to be more closely aligned with other proposals in…the Bill. In addition the proposals will require: closer partnership working between all land management agencies and local government; the strengthening of the skills base in addressing integration of land planning and land management issues.

At a conference on 16 May 2006 Lady Isabel Glasgow asserted that there was an argument that NSAs stop what we do not want happening, rather than encouraging what we do want to see happening. (Sustainable Landscapes Conference 2006 ).

There is some concern that an important piece in the jigsaw of improving NSAs, the process of legislating, has been rather hurried and closes down time for some debate on key aspects. However the view seems to be that the Executive should move forward with the proposals rather than wait for another legislative vehicle (APRS and Scottish Environment LINK 2006). Indeed the co-author of the original advice John W. Mackay (2006) makes the point in his submission that “it is appropriate that [revisiting of NSAs] comes in a Planning Bill, as this is a designation enmeshed with the planning system, and planning policy is critical to the care of the natural heritage”. However Mackay urges more flexibility for the designation stating that it “needs to have more effect outwith the planning system, for example in its interactions with new approaches to funding land management”.

Cairngorms National Park Authority (2006a) takes the view that the consultation document does not adequately kick off a wider debate on landscape.

The Council for Scottish Archaeology indicated concern that NSAs would continue to be based on natural heritage and that the protection of cultural heritage landscapes could be underplayed. The Council calls for the Inventory of Gardens & Designed Landscapes to be re- examined by the Scottish Executive and for landscape to be considered along with other policy instruments such as the Scottish Rural Development Plan, which will run from 2007-2013. Historic Scotland may have views on this but it is understood their response to the consultation is confidential.

providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 17 COM/S2/06/19/2 Dumfries and Galloway Council (2006) which has experience of pilot Management Strategies say that they:

are aware that many of the changes that can fundamentally affect the quality of NSAs such as aquaculture, agricultural and farming practices do not require planning permission. The aims of the designation must therefore be supported systematically, as suggested, through mainstream support schemes such as Land Management Contracts and the Scottish Forestry Grant Scheme.

There were some views (Highlands Before Pylons, Norman Campbell 2006) which highlighted confusion relating to a map used in the consultation document which included a 10km zone around NSAs.

Some respondents (for instance Forestry Commission Scotland 2006c) have expressed the view that it is difficult to comment on the implications for NSAs of the review of the General Permitted Development Order, which outlines what development which can go ahead without going through the formal planning process.

Ramblers Association Scotland (2006) generally welcome the proposals but are concerned that NSAs alone will not “meet the challenge to Scotland’s landscape presented by development pressure such as renewable energy developments”.

The Macaulay Institute (2006) felt that the consultation document assertion that the landscapes designated as NSAs were the very best of the landscapes was open to considerable debate and should be reconsidered. Macaulay asked:

Is there consensus that, as an ‘accolade designation’, the existing coverage represents ‘the very best of our scenery’. This seems unlikely. Therefore, can areas be added or removed from the existing list of areas designated as NSAs?

The basis of designation The basis of designation is broadly supported, however NTS (2006) are concerned that the distinction is made between ‘scenery/scenic’ and ‘landscape’. NTS point out that the consultation document uses these interchangeably but that in its view “‘scenic quality’ relates to landscapes which are more than simply attractive but are characterised by, for example, visual drama, fine visual composition and a sense of the spectacular” and “the diverse character of Scotland’s landscapes derives from different interlinked combinations of landform, land cover and human influence. However, people mainly perceive landscape through appreciating its scenic qualities, whilst often adding other values to this appreciation according to their individual experiences or backgrounds”.

Scottish and Southern Energy (2006) is sceptical that the NSA designation is seen as an accolade by the general public, asking how someone knows when they are in one and when they are not.

Professor Colin T. Reid, Professor of Environmental Law at the University of Dundee (2006) states:

…there will need to be fuller legal development of the public participation element of the process in order to satisfy the Aarhus Convention and the needs of Strategic Environmental Assessment.

providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 18 COM/S2/06/19/2 Highlands and Islands Enterprise (2006) echoes this stating “it is fundamental that a broader suite of stakeholders; for example Local Economic Forums and Community Planning Partnerships are engaged with the NSA designation”.

Forestry Commission Scotland (2006c) picks up the issue that planning law does not cover forestry, and points out that:

Local Authorities already take the lead in preparing Indicative Forestry Strategies, which provide general guidance for forestry developments in their areas. Local Authorities are also able to object to planting applications and any such objections trigger referral of the case to the Regional Advisory Committee, Commissioners and – if still unresolved – Scottish Ministers.

A New Statutory Purpose for NSAs The aims of the designation are proposed to include reference to the “social and economic needs of communities”. This drew some comment:

• The Royal Society of Edinburgh (2006) felt that “and of the nation” should be added to this phrase, in order to ensure national interests were always balanced against local interests. ScottishPower (2006) also made this suggestion • Scottish Environment LINK want the reference removed as they see it as vague and unnecessary. They suggest another wording by the Council of Scottish Archaeology “to manage changes arising from development and other pressures consistent with protecting and enhancing the special qualities of the NSAs” • The Crofters Commission (2006) felt the wording was weak and that land users needed a more robust definition • Scottish Enterprise Network (2006) felt a further reference should be made to opportunities for communities, an approach echoed by Orkney Islands Council (2006)

NTS (2006) believes a duty to further the conservation of NSAs should be placed upon all public bodies and that local authorities and SNH must be given additional resources to ensure land managers are helped to deliver landscape policy.

Scottish Environment LINK (2006) would like a specific mention of the need for identification and protection of cultural heritage landscapes. LINK further point out that many of the critical land use changes are outwith the scope of the planning system and that consideration of agricultural measures is of paramount importance.

The Association for the Protection of Rural Scotland (2006) draws attention to the Scottish Executives new “finalised model policies on the built environment and natural heritage, which are suitable for most local authorities to use in the preparation of new development plans”. APRS point out that Scottish Executive work (2006b) on 'Pilot Model Policy' states that in relation to NSAs, development will only be permitted where it has been demonstrated that2:

• The overall objectives of the designated area and the overall integrity of the area would not be compromised: or • Any significant adverse effects on the qualities for which the area has been designated are clearly outweighed by social or economic benefits of national importance.

2 This is based on NPPG 14 Natural Heritage providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 19 COM/S2/06/19/2 Designation of NSAs NTS felt that SNH should have the power to consider and bring forward proposals for new NSAs and that the Planning Bill should clearly give statutory confirmation to the existing NSAs. NTS further feels that Notices of new NSAs or changes to existing NSAs must be advertised more widely than the consultation option of advertising in the Edinburgh Gazette and a local newspaper.

RSE (2006) believes designation and de-designation decisions should rest primarily with an independent body such as SNH, who would recommend changes to Scottish Ministers. RSE further proposes that Scottish Ministers could make minor changes, but major changes should require Parliamentary approval.

Scottish Environment LINK (2006) believes the definition of the “other relevant bodies” whom Scottish Ministers must consult with should be much clearer.

Dumfries and Galloway Council (2006) is “very concerned that no new or additional obligations to enhance or prevent the deterioration of the character of these nationally designated landscapes will be applied as a result of the proposals”. The Council further ask:

How can the designation become more effective in safeguarding the areas if there is no apparent change to the Status Quo?

The Landscape Institute Scotland is of the view that landscape architects should have a role to play in both the designation of NSAs and the development of management plans. (LIS 2006). LIS further recommends that “the legislation be drafted so that if any proposed change within an NSA is inescapably in conflict with the underlying purpose of the designation, then priority must be given to the long term conservation of the qualities for which the area has been designated”.

The John Muir Trust (JMT 2006) is content with the proposed roles for SNH, local authorities and the Scottish Ministers. APRS (2006) feel more clarity is required on these roles. Macaulay (2006) feel that in order to be consistent with the aims of the European Landscape Convention, consideration should be given to a bottom-up approach to proposing NSAs.

APRS (2006) examines the integrity of NSAs with regard to landscape outwith the designated areas. APRS draws on the example of areas of land closely wedged between two NSAs, and suggests that SNH/Historic Scotland work on extending the Inventory of Gardens and Designed Landscapes could be used in this type of situation.

Sportscotland (2006) introduces a new theme, and wonders whether tranquillity and peace and quiet are considered components of the landscape, and a special quality as they are concerned that sport and recreation which may generate noise could be restricted from scenic landscapes.

ScottishPower (2006) would wish to be regarded as statutory consultees.

Views on extending the number of NSAs The Council for Scottish Archaeology supported extending the suite of 40 NSAs but reiterated that cultural heritage values should be incorporated systematically into any judgements on new NSAs. Comhairle Nan Eilean Siar (2006) feel that 6,000 years of mans activity should be reflected in considering the character of landscape.

Highlands and Islands Enterprise (2006) feels boundary and management issues need addressed in the existing suite before any additions are considered. The Scottish Wild Land providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 20 COM/S2/06/19/2 Group (2006) whilst being very supportive of most of the proposals believes that consideration must be given to designating more NSAs.

NSAs and National Parks As background, in the draft Looking to 2030 document, the Cairngorms National Park Authority (2006b) states:

While the Park contains two National Scenic Areas identified for their national significance, the designation of the National Park has highlighted the national importance and coherence of the landscape qualities throughout its area. Accordingly, landscape considerations will be included in all activities that could affect landscape character anywhere within the Park.

However, Cairngorms National Park Authority (2006a) in its response to the Scottish Executive consultation are “extremely concerned that the contribution of National parks towards the conservation of Scotland’s very best landscapes remains unclear” and that “without clarification there will be pressure to take a more lenient line towards landscape conservation in the parts of the Parks outwith NSAs, as they will be regarded as being of lesser value. We have already seen pressure for this approach to be taken”.

Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park Authority (2006) points out that National Parks already have four equal aims but that where there is conflict, the aim to protect and enhance the natural and cultural heritage of the Park must take precedence.

APRS (2006), in line with the suggestion made by SNH, believe that NSAs should be de- designated where they sit entirely within a National Park as any additional provisions under the General Permitted Development Order for NSAs should be extended consistently across the National Park areas. APRS further believes that new National Parks should not fragment existing NSAs.

Aberdeenshire Council (2006) is of the view that NSAs should be retained in National Parks. The Council for Scottish Archaeology agree, citing Cairngorms in particular as planning powers for the National Park are less than at Loch Lomond and the Trossachs.

The Scottish Council for National Parks (2006) is of the view that NSAs are an obvious starting point for future National Parks. The Scottish Wild Land Group (2006) believes it is too early in the lives of the National Parks for de-designation of NSAs in their boundaries to be considered. Further they believe that landscape and natural heritage are not necessarily being put as the primary aim in Scotland’s National Parks, and in particular Cairngorms National Park. VisitScotland (2006) consider that it “would make sense to consider overlapping designations on an individual basis as boundaries are reviewed, again with the customer in mind”.

Management Strategies NTS (2006) believe there should be a statutory requirement on local authorities to prepare a Management Strategy for each NSA. The JMT (2006) sees it as vital that local communities are involved in preparing Management Strategies for NSAs.

Highland Council (2006) as one area which has operated pilot Management Strategies states:

the evidence from the preparation of the Wester Ross NSA Management Strategy is that they require exhaustive community engagement efforts and partner commitment to be meaningful. This is reflected in the fact that the strategy has not yet been formally providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 21 COM/S2/06/19/2 approved by the council. The preparation of strategies for the 15 NSAs in Highland by 2010 is therefore considered totally unworkable, even if the necessary resources were put in place. And

Another mechanism for achieving most of the benefits of a new Management Strategy is available in other provisions of the Planning etc. (Scotland) Bill. The new local development plan and its associated action programme would appear to be a much more effective, efficient and more inclusive method of preparing a Management Strategy.

Dumfries and Galloway Council (2006) the other council involved in the pilot scheme are more positive about the Management Strategy approach, and disagree with the proposal that Management Strategies are pursued through a voluntary approach. The Council also believe that issues in smaller NSAs can be just as complex as those found in larger NSAs. They further state that they:

support the recognition of the important mutual interdependence between communities living and working in the NSA and the landscape resource. From the experience of the pilot project, active communities and centres of population within, or linked to, NSAs, have assisted in driving the Management Strategy and implementation process forward

Timing of introduction of Management Strategies is seen as a key issue. SNH, NTS and Macaulay all believe the 5 year target is too ambitious, whilst JMT are concerned that those councils with the highest workload – i.e. those with the most NSAs – would get longer to implement Management Strategies. By definition this would leave some of the key areas with less protection for a longer period of time. Shetland Islands Council (2006) believes the target to be ambitious but attainable with the right support.

APRS (2006) is of the view that a Sustainable Development Fund, similar to that provided in England would assist the development of Management Strategies.

VisitScotland (2006) “welcome the strengthened focus on maximising the benefits for [sic] NSAs for tourism”. VisitScotland further suggest that costs could be reduced by having a national strategy for NSAs with local action plans addressing specific local issues.

Forestry Commission Scotland (2006c) was involved in the pilot Management Strategies for NSAs in Dumfries and Galloway and endorse both the process and outputs developed by the local council and SNH. Forestry Commission Scotland further suggests that five-yearly reviews would be appropriate.

East Ayrshire Council (2006) feels that local authorities may be limited in implementing Management Strategies as they do not have planning controls over the activities with greatest visual impact in the landscape such as forestry, amenity woodlands and agricultural land practices. Aberdeenshire Council (2006) feels SNH should be charged with leading on production of Management Strategies, or commissioning and co-ordinating consultants, as SNH have the fundamental landscape expertise. The Council also feels an overall approach from SNH would lead to consistency of approach across the country.

Mackay (2006) states “I fear this is a weak link in the whole package. and that more than encouragement to local authorities is required” and “A single example of the need to give NSAs some strong direction is the new land-management funding through the single farm payment. In the absence of any practical guidance as to the needs of the NSAs, expenditure from one public hand could be acting counter to, or in ignorance of, what is desired on the other”. providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 22 COM/S2/06/19/2

Other respondents echoed such an integrated approach. The Deer Commission for Scotland (2006) feels that, given the iconic status of sustainably managed deer to visitors, deer management should be considered in Management Strategies.

Scottish Borders Council (2006) is concerned about the burden on local authorities reflecting that SNH funding a post for a short period of time before the local authority is expected to pick up the slack (citing access and biodiversity), and that consideration must be given to longer term support. Perth and Kinross Council (2006) states “..grant aid from SNH seldom compensates Local Authorities for all additional costs incurred”. Comhairle Nan Eilean Siar (20060 put forward a similar view stating “of strategic concern to the Comhairle is the introduction of further legislative responsibilities for Local Authorities without clarification on the provision of resources required”.

Scottish Countryside Alliance (2006) would like to see a much more detailed cost benefit analysis of the proposals. The Scottish Enterprise Network (2006) considers that local businesses should be consulted and involved in Management Strategies. Macaulay (2006) further wonders what thought has been given to choosing a seven year review period.

ENGLAND AND WALES - AREAS OF OUTSTANDING NATURAL BEAUTY England and Wales’ national landscape designation is the ‘Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty’ (AONB), which has some similarities with Scotland’s NSA designation. There are 40 AONBs in England and Wales (National Association for AONBs 2006). AONBs were brought into being by the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949 but the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 placed them on a more secure statutory footing backed up by enhanced funding. Key elements are (Defra 2006):

• AONBs are fine landscapes, of great variety in character and extent • criteria for designation is their outstanding natural beauty. Many AONBs also fulfil a recreational role but, unlike national parks, this is not a designation criteria • Countryside Agency and the Countryside Council for Wales are responsible for designating AONBs and advising Government on policies for their protection and support them through grant aid • Administration of planning and development control in AONBs is for the relevant local authorities, though Government endorses the establishment of joint advisory committees to bring together local authorities, amenity groups, farming etc • Larger AONBs can apply to establish independent Conservation Boards – these are intended to simplify the administration of larger or more complex AONBs. Defra say they have no wish to create two-tier AONBs and that a decision for establishment of a Conservation Board must be a local one • Statutory purpose is to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the area, and this should be reflected in development plans • All AONBs are required to prepare and publish a management plan. If such a document already exists it can be adopted as the management plan • In spring 2005 Defra introduced a Sustainable Development Fund for AONBs, with around £10m of funding available over 3 years. This supports management plans and broader sustainable development objectives.

The National Association of AONBs was formed in 1988. It is an independent organisation which acts on behalf of AONBs, with membership largely drawn from local authorities which have an AONB in their boundary.

providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 23 COM/S2/06/19/2 SOURCES

Aberdeenshire Council (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Association for the Protection of Rural Scotland (APRS 2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Cairngorms National Park Authority (2006a) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Cairngorms National Park Authority (2006b) Looking to 2030. Grantown-On-Spey. Available at: http://www.cairngorms.co.uk/parkauthority/nationalparkplan/looking.php

Campbell, Norman (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Comhairle Nan Eilean Siar (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Crofters Commission (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Council for Scottish Archaeology (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Council of Europe (2000) European Landscape Convention. Available at: http://www.coe.int/t/e/Cultural_Co-operation/Environment/Landscape/

Deer Commission for Scotland (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs - Landscape Protection [Online] Available at http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-countryside/issues/landscap/aonbs.htm

Dumfries and Galloway Council (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Dumfries and Galloway Council National Scenic Area Management Strategies [Online] Available at: http://www.dumgal.gov.uk/dumgal/miniweb.aspx?id=254

East Ayrshire Council (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Forestry Commission Scotland (2006a) Draft Revised Scottish Forestry Strategy. Available at: http://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/INFD-6MGEQN

Forestry Commission Scotland (2006b) Consultation on the review of the Scottish Forestry Grants Scheme (SFGS). Available at: http://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/infd-6p3m99

Forestry Commission Scotland (2006c) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 24 COM/S2/06/19/2

Glasgow, Lady Isobel (2006) Speech at Sustainable Landscapes conference. Edinburgh 16 May 2006. Conference details at: http://www.holyrood.com/nav/conference/future_events/conf_susland06/conference.asp?conten t=contents

Highlands and Islands Enterprise (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Highlands Before Pylons (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Highland Council (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

John Muir Trust (JMT 2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Landscape Institute Scotland (LIS 2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park Authority (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Macaulay Institute (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Mackay, John W. (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

National Association for AONBs [Online] Available at: http://www.aonb.org.uk/wba/naaonb/naaonbpreview.nsf/Web Default Frameset?OpenFrameSet&Frame=Main&Src=/wba/naaonb/naaonbpreview.nsf/$LU.WebHome Page/$first!OpenDocument&AutoFramed

National Trust for Scotland (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Orkney Islands Council (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Planning etc (Scotland) Bill [as introduced] Session 2 (2005). SP Bill 51. Scottish Parliament http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/bills/51-planning/index.htm

Ramblers Association Scotland (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Reid, A. (2005). SPICe Briefing 05-08 Protected Areas. Edinburgh: Scottish Parliament. Available at: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/research/briefings-05/SB05-08.pdf

Reid, Professor Professor Colin T. (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 25 COM/S2/06/19/2 Royal Society of Edinburgh (RSE 2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

RTPI Scotland (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Scottish Agriculture College (unpublished) The Economic Valuation of Landscapes

Scottish and Southern Energy (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Scottish Borders Council (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Scottish Council for National Parks (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Scottish Countryside Alliance (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Scottish Enterprise Network (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Scottish Environment LINK (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Scottish Executive (1999). NPPG 14 on Natural Heritage. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive. Available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/1999/01/nppg14

Scottish Executive (2004) National Planning Framework Edinburgh: Scottish Executive. Available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2004/04/19170/35317

Scottish Executive (2006a). Consultation paper: Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscape. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive. Available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/01/27145442/0

Scottish Executive (2006b) Pilot model policy study. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive. Available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/01/24141301/0

Scottish Executive (2006e) Personal Communication

Scottish Office (1980) SDD Circular 20/1980, Development control in NSAs.

Scottish Parliament Communities Committee (2006a) Official Report 1st meeting 2006, Session 2,11 January 2006. Col 2751. Edinburgh: Scottish Parliament. Available at: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/committees/communities/or-06/co06- 0102.htm#Col2751

Scottish Parliament Communities Committee (2006b) Official Report 4th meeting 2006, Session 2, 8 February 2006. Col 2956. Edinburgh: Scottish Parliament. Available at: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/committees/communities/or-06/co06- 0402.htm#Col2956

providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 26 COM/S2/06/19/2 Scottish Parliament Communities Committee (2006c) Official Report 5th meeting 2006, Session 2, 8 February 2006. Col 3019. Edinburgh: Scottish Parliament. Available at: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/committees/communities/or-06/co06-0502.htm

ScottishPower (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Scottish Natural Heritage National Scenic Areas [Online] Available at: http://www.snh.org.uk/scripts-snh/ab-pa03.asp

Scottish Natural Heritage (1999) National Scenic Areas: Scottish Natural Heritage's Advice to Government. Edinburgh: Scottish Natural Heritage. Available at: http://www.snh.org.uk/news/1out-nsa2.asp

Scottish Natural Heritage (2000) Policy Summary: National Scenic Areas. Edinburgh: Scottish Natural Heritage. Available at: http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/polsum/NSA.pdf

Scottish Natural Heritage (2002a) Natural Heritage Zones: A National Assessment of Scotland’s Landscapes. Edinburgh: Scottish Natural Heritage. Available at: http://www.snh.org.uk/futures/Data/pdfdocs/LANDSCAPES.pdf

Scottish Natural Heritage (2002b) Natural Heritage Trends Notes. Edinburgh: Scottish Natural Heritage. Available at: http://www.snh.org.uk/trends/trends_notes/default.asp

Scottish Natural Heritage (2003) Scotland’s Future Landscapes – Encouraging a wider debate. Edinburgh: Scottish Natural Heritage. Available at: http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/strategy/advisingothers/LandDiscPaper.pdf

Scottish Natural Heritage and the English Countryside Agency (2002) Landscape Character Assessment Guidance. Available at: http://www.landscapecharacter.org.uk/lca-guidance.html

Scottish Natural Heritage and Historic Scotland (2005) Guidance on Local Landscape Designations. Edinburgh: Scottish Natural heritage and Historic Scotland. Available at: http://www.snh.org.uk/pubs/pdf/save.asp?pid=389&pdf=pdfs/publications/heritagemanagement/ GuidanceonLocalLandscapeDesignations.pdf

Scottish Natural Heritage (2006a) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Scottish Natural Heritage (2006b) Proceedings of seminar to debate the Scottish Executive proposals: Enhancing our care of Scotland’s landscapes. Available at: http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/press_releases/seminar090306.pdf

Scottish Natural Heritage (2006c) Personal Communication

Scottish Wild Land Group (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

Sportscotland (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

VisitScotland (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 27 COM/S2/06/19/2

Wildlife Expeditions (2006) Response to Scottish Executive Rural Group Consultation on Enhancing Our Care of Scotland’s Landscapes

providing research and information services to the Scottish Parliament 28 COM/S2/06/22/6

COMMUNITIES COMMITTEE

22nd Meeting, 2006 (Session 2)

Wednesday 6 September 2006

Planning etc. (Scotland) Bill – Local Authority Interest Cases

Scottish Executive Note

Scottish Executive Proposals

In future, full planning permission will be required for all development proposals where the local authority for the area (i) is the developer, (ii) is a landowner, or (iii) has some other financial interest.

This means that all local authority developments will be subject to the wider reforms of the planning modernisation package, such as the requirement (in some cases) for pre-application consultations and mandatory public hearings.

Where a local authority wants to grant planning permission on an ‘LA interest’ case, but the proposal either constitutes a departure from the development plan or is the subject of a substantial body of objections, the authority must first notify Scottish Ministers who will consider whether to call it in for their own determination.

The proposals also include a new enhanced level of local scrutiny prior to notification to Scottish Ministers: (a) the authority must inform objectors of its decision to grant planning permission and its reasons for reaching that decision; (b) the objectors would be invited to comment on those reasons and make further representations to Ministers if they consider that their views have not been properly dealt with by the council; and (c) after taking further representations into account, if the authority is still minded to grant consent it should then notify Scottish Ministers as above.

The Scottish Executive will publish guidance to local authorities setting out Ministers’ expectations about the quality of councils’ handling and assessments of these planning applications and clarifying the circumstances in which the proposals must be notified to Ministers. The guidance will also set out the circumstances in which Ministerial call-in of planning applications will be possible, or even likely, subject to consideration of all relevant issues.

How these changes will be effected

Planning etc. (Scotland) Bill:

The Scottish Executive proposes the following amendments to the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997:

COM/S2/06/22/6

• Section 43 – various amendments to the power to give directions in respect of the method of dealing with planning applications [already set out in section 15 of the Planning etc. (Scotland) Bill]

• Section 263 – we also intend to repeal the provision which enables regulations allowing separate planning procedures for developments by planning authorities (i.e. the Notice of Intention to Develop procedure)

Following Royal Assent:

Early action to be taken on these new proposals:

• revoke the Regulations governing Notices of Intention to Develop, ensuring local authority developments are subject to planning applications; • amend the General Development Procedure Order to give effect to the amended Section 43; • issue a new Notification Direction, to include the new requirements for local consultation and notification of local authority interest developments, along with other notification categories; and • publish guidance for local authorities – a replacement for Planning Advice Note (PAN) 55: PFI and the Planning Process

Local authority interest cases to be notified to Scottish Ministers

Planning authorities will need to notify Scottish Ministers where they propose to grant planning permission for developments where they are the developer, landowner or have a financial or other interest in the development proceeding if either: (i) the proposal constitutes a departure from the terms of the development plan for the area; or (ii) it has been the subject of a substantial body of objections.

The judgement call about whether notification to Ministers is appropriate in any particular case will always be influenced by the individual circumstances and characteristics of the case. There have been times in the past where planning authorities have interpreted the terms of the notification requirement as meaning that certain cases need not be notified, to the disappointment of local objectors who thought they should be passed to Ministers. There have also been cases where applications were notified by planning authorities which probably did not need to be. The Scottish Executive will publish guidance to assist with the interpretation of the Notification Direction, including advice on terms such as “departure from the development plan” and “substantial body of objections”. This guidance should ensure that (i) applications which should be notified to Ministers will be notified, (ii) applications that need not be notified will not be unduly delayed by going through this process, and (iii) there is greater consistency in how this is applied across Scotland.

Scottish Executive Development Department Planning Division August 2006

COM/S2/06/22/7

COMMUNITIES COMMITTEE

22nd Meeting, 2006 (Session 2)

Wednesday 6 September 2006

Subordinate Legislation

Title of Instrument The Automated Registration of Title to Land (Electronic Communications) (Scotland) Order 2006, (draft) Standing Order 10.6.1(a) (Affirmative) Laid Date 12 June 2006 Circulated to 23 June 2006 Members Reporting Deadline 18 September 2006

Background

1. This Order makes provision for changes to legislation to enable the introduction of the Automated Registration of Title to Land (ARTL) system, an electronic system for the registration of land. The Requirements of Writing (Scotland) Act 1995, amended by the Order, does not currently provide for the use of electronic documents and communication for land and property deeds and the Land Registration (Scotland) Act 1979 does not provide for the issue of Certificates of Title as electronic communications.

2. Johann Lamont MSP, Deputy Minister for Communities, will attend the meeting to move motion S2M-4583 in relation to this instrument.

ARTL System

3. The ARTL system has been developed by Registers of Scotland in conjunction with key stakeholders including the Law Society of Scotland and the Council of Mortgage Lenders. It is planned that the system will be introduced in November 2006 with live operation being available throughout Scotland by April 2007.

4. The system will provide an electronic alternative to the current paper process for the registration of land. Solicitors and lenders will have online access to the Land Register for Scotland and will be able to create and submit electronic deeds with applications for registration and, when requested by the applicant, electronic Certificates of Title may be issued. The system will apply to routine transactions, such as transfers of ownership and remortgages, involving properties that are already registered in the Land Register.

The Requirements of Writing (Scotland) Act 1995

5. The 1995 Act governs the form and means of authenticating a variety of legal documents. These documents are required to have tangible form and to be authenticated by the person(s) granting the deed. The purpose of the Order is to enable electronic documents, authenticated by digital signatures to be created and submitted within the ARTL system.

The Land Registration (Scotland) Act 1979

6. The amendments proposed to the 1979 Act will enable the Keeper of the Registers of Scotland to accept applications for registration by electronic communication in relation to ARTL. The Order will also permit Land and Charge Certificates to be issued as electronic communications, authenticated by the Keeper, where the applicant for registration so wishes.

Consultation and Regulatory Impact Assessment

7. Consultation on this instrument was carried out by Registers of Scotland between August and November 2005. Ten responses to the consultation were received from respondents including local authorities and academics. Two stakeholder forums were also established and met prior to the consultation being conducted, an external stakeholder user group and an institutional lenders group. The Executive Note accompanying the instrument indicates that respondents were largely content with the proposals contained in the draft order.

8. A full regulatory impact assessment (RIA) has been conducted in relation to the Order covering issues such as costs and benefits of the proposed changes, the impact on small and micro businesses and enforcement and sanctions. The final RIA is attached to the instrument circulated to Members.

Subordinate Legislation Committee Report

9. The Subordinate Legislation Committee (SLC) did not have any comments to make in relation to this instrument.1

Recommendation

10. The Committee should decide whether it agrees or disagrees to the motion and report its decision to Parliament by the deadline indicated above.

Steve Farrell Clerk to the Communities Committee Tel. 0131 348 5211 email: [email protected]

1 Subordinate Legislation Committee, 30th Report 2006 COM/S2/06/22/8

COMMUNITIES COMMITTEE

22nd Meeting, 2006 (Session 2)

Wednesday 6 September 2006

Subordinate Legislation

Title of Instrument The Town and Country Planning (Application of Subordinate Legislation to the Crown) (Inquiries Procedure) (Scotland) Order 2006, (SSI 2006/339) Standing Order 10.4 (Negative) Laid Date 9 June 2006 Circulated to 23 June 2006 Members Force Date 1 July 2006 Reporting Deadline 18 September 2006

Background

1. This Order is the final in a set of subordinate legislation, laid under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, in relation to the removal of Crown immunity from planning control1.

2. The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 provides for the application of subordinate legislation made under or for the purposes of the planning Acts to the Crown. The purpose of this Order is to so apply the Town and Country Planning (Inquiries Procedure) (Scotland) Rules 19972 and the Town and Country Planning Appeals (Determination by Appointed Person) (Inquiries Procedure) (Scotland) Rules 19973.

3. The Order also modifies various rules relating to the procedure to be followed at planning inquiries to take account of the new provisions dealing with the appointment of persons to represent the interests of any person who is prevented from hearing or inspecting evidence at a planning inquiry which is subject to a national security direction. In addition, the Order makes provision in relation to applications for development that are certified by the Crown body as being of national importance and required urgently.

4. SSIs relating to these new provisions were considered by the Committee at its meeting on 14 June 2006. The Committee had no comment to make in relation to these instruments.

1 Previous SSIs in the set were considered by the Committee on 19 April and 14 June 2 SI 1997/796 3 SI 1997/750

Subordinate Legislation Committee Report

5. The Subordinate Legislation Committee (SLC) did not have any comments to make in relation to this instrument4.

Recommendation

6. The Committee is invited to consider any issues which it wishes to raise in reporting to the Parliament on these instruments.

Steve Farrell Clerk to the Communities Committee Tel. 0131 348 5211 email: [email protected]

4 Subordinate Legislation Committee, 30th Report 2006