COMMUNITIES COMMITTEE Wednesday 6 September 2006 Session 2 £5.00 Parliamentary copyright. Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body 2006. Applications for reproduction should be made in writing to the Licensing Division, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ Fax 01603 723000, which is administering the copyright on behalf of the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body. Produced and published in Scotland on behalf of the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body by Astron. CONTENTS Wednesday 6 September 2006 Col. PLANNING ETC (SCOTLAND) BILL .................................................................................................................... 3811 SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION ........................................................................................................................... 3851 Automated Registration of Title to Land (Electronic Communications) (Scotland) Order 2006 (Draft) ..... 3851 Town and Country Planning (Application of Subordinate Legislation to the Crown) (Inquiries Procedure) (Scotland) Order 2006 (SSI 2006/339) ................................................................ 3853 COMMUNITIES COMMITTEE 22nd Meeting 2006, Session 2 CONVENER *Karen Whitefield (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab) DEPUTY CONVENER *Euan Robson (Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (LD) COMMITTEE MEMBERS *Scott Barrie (Dunfermline West) (Lab) *Cathie Craigie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (Lab) *Christine Grahame (South of Scotland) (SNP) *Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green) *John Home Robertson (East Lothian) (Lab) *Tricia Marwick (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP) *Dave Petrie (Highlands and Islands (Con) COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTES Chris Ballance (South of Scotland) (Green) Alex Johnstone (North East Scotland) (Con) Christine May (Central Fife) (Lab) Mike Rumbles (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD) Ms Sandra White (Glasgow) (SNP) *attended THE FOLLOWING GAVE EVIDENCE: Rhona Brankin (Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development) Johann Lamont (Deputy Minister for Communities) Judith Morrison (Scottish Executive Legal and Parliamentary Services) Sally Thomas (Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs Department) Ken Young (Registers of Scotland) CLERK TO THE COMMITTEE Steve Farrell SENIOR ASSISTANT CLERK Katy Orr ASSISTANT CLERK Catherine Fergusson LOCATION Committee Room 4 3811 6 SEPTEMBER 2006 3812 towards the cost of preparation. The management Scottish Parliament measures will be voluntary and non-statutory and do not form part of the amendment. Communities Committee National scenic areas represent the very best of Scotland’s landscapes. We must continue to Wednesday 6 September 2006 safeguard those areas to ensure that their special qualities endure to be enjoyed by present and [THE CONVENER opened the meeting at 09:30] future generations. Such areas are very sensitive to development or intrusive human activity. Planning etc (Scotland) Bill I know that the committee has listened to a wide range of views on the proposals and I hope that in The Convener (Karen Whitefield): I open the nd answering your questions I will be able to explain 22 meeting of the Communities Committee in further why we intend to lodge the amendment. 2006 and remind everyone that mobile phones should be turned off. The first item on this The Convener: I am sure that you have morning’s agenda is the Planning etc (Scotland) reviewed the evidence that the committee has Bill. The committee will take evidence on national heard to date on national scenic areas. You will scenic areas from Rhona Brankin, the Deputy therefore know about the concern that the Minister for Environment and Rural Development. I proposals in the amendment were not included in welcome the deputy minister to the committee. the bill. Why not? She is accompanied by Scottish Executive officials Rhona Brankin: As you know, the NSA Sally Thomas, Bob McNeill and Judith Morrison. proposals address a gap in the legal provisions for I am sure that the committee has missed NSAs, through the regularisation of an anomaly in considering the Planning etc (Scotland) Bill in the powers that are available to Scottish ministers. depth over the summer recess and that we are Because the proposals were to regularise an delighted to be back this morning. Minister, would anomaly, they were not regarded as being you like to make a brief opening statement or are essential for inclusion in the white paper in the first you happy for us to go straight to questions? place. The paper deals with major proposals for the planning system. The Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development (Rhona Brankin): I will make Sally Thomas (Scottish Executive a brief statement. Environment and Rural Affairs Department): When the white paper was prepared, the I am grateful to the committee for inviting us proposals were not regarded as being a major today because I am keen to explain our proposals issue for the Planning etc (Scotland) Bill. We felt for national scenic areas. The draft amendment that including them in an amendment, rather than that the committee is considering will introduce putting them in the bill without any form of proposals that were set out earlier this year in the consultation, gave us the opportunity to consult on consultation document, “Enhancing Our Care of them a little more widely. That is another reason Scotland’s Landscapes”. why the proposals were not included at the outset. The amendment will provide Scottish ministers The Convener: Do you accept that if the with powers to designate an NSA for its proposal had been included in the white paper, outstanding scenic value in a national context, and there would have been considerable consultation to vary or revoke an NSA. Before designating an on it, as there has been on much of what has been NSA, Scottish ministers will consult Scottish included in the bill? I think that I am right in saying Natural Heritage and such other bodies as may be that the committee has serious concerns that, at prescribed. The amendment will also require such a late stage in a bill that has been thoroughly planning authorities to pay special attention to the consulted on and which has taken stakeholders desirability of safeguarding or enhancing any area from all communities effectively through the that is so designated when they exercise any of process, something is being added that has not their functions under the Town and Country been thoroughly consulted on. It does not make Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. obvious sense why the proposal has been The consultation paper also included proposals included. for encouraging the development of management Rhona Brankin: There was not a large number strategies for NSAs, which would include of people saying that they were unhappy with the programmes of targeted and costed measures that consultation, although I can understand your view are appropriate for the management of each area. about the proposal not being included in The proposal is for SNH to work with local consultation on the planning process. That authorities on the preparation of management predates my time as a minister, but the important strategies; grant will be available from SNH to go point is that consultation has now taken place—we 3813 6 SEPTEMBER 2006 3814 are satisfied that there was adequate consultation authorities in Scotland are satisfied that there will through the process that took place at the start of not be additional financial burdens as a result of the year. I accept that it might have been the amendment? They are extremely exercised preferable to do it during consultation on the bill, about the financial burdens that will be placed on but the important point is that consultation has them as a result of the new planning legislation. taken place. Rhona Brankin: I can only assume that if The Convener: I accept that people might not COSLA were “extremely exercised” about the have expressed concern about whether the financial burdens that will be associated with the Executive has consulted thoroughly on the amendment it would have responded to the proposal, but concerns have been expressed to consultation. I am always more than happy to the committee about whether the legislation is the have discussions with COSLA. My door is open. appropriate vehicle for the proposal on NSAs. Can you explain to the committee why you believe that Christine Grahame (South of Scotland) the Planning etc (Scotland) Bill is the most (SNP): I have a supplementary question about appropriate vehicle for the proposal? whether the Planning etc (Scotland) Bill is the appropriate vehicle for the proposal. I note that for Rhona Brankin: One reason why the legislation the most part the bill stops at the low-water mark, was not introduced sooner was that, when the but the amendment covers marine areas as well Labour-Liberal Democrat Executive partnership as land. The list of national scenic areas includes was established, a major commitment was to the many lochs. How can the bill be the appropriate establishment of national parks. That involved a place for the measure? It does not really deal with large piece of legislation, which inevitably took up lochs. a lot of time for officials and ministers; in fact, the work on approving national park plans continues. Judith Morrison (Scottish Executive Legal A huge amount of time and energy has been taken and Parliamentary Services): Planning control is up with the National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000, one of the main proposed protection measures for which is the key reason for not introducing