Our Petition to the Scottish Parliament was heard by the Committee for the fourth time in January 2023. Having considered all the evidence, Members of the Committee voted to support our Petition and wrote to the Scottish Government with their recommendations. A reply was received from the Scottish Government on 17 April. The following letter is the SAS reaction to the Scottish Government’s response to the recommendations made by the Petitions’ Committee. It will receive further consideration before Summer recess.
SCOTLAND AGAINST SPIN’S reaction to the SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT’S response to the recommendations made by the CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND PUBLIC PETITIONS COMMITTEE
Recommendation 1 – the Scottish Government should now
undertake work to explore the benefits and disadvantages of
altering [the 50MW] threshold. The Committee also recommends that
Scottish Government explore the scope for planning authorities
to determine more applications for onshore windfarm developments.
We thank the new Minister for Local Government Empowerment and Planning for his submission of 17 April 2023. SAS welcomes the commitment of the Scottish Government to undertake work to explore the many benefits to communities and government of altering the 50MW threshold and to explore the scope for planning authorities to determine more applications for onshore wind farm developments.
RTPI’s submission of 6 Oct 2021, “welcomes the exploration of opportunities and challenges to allow Planning Authorities to determine more applications for onshore wind which will result in greater involvement of communities throughout the consenting process.”
Recommendation 2 – the Committee further recommends that the Scottish Government explore opportunities to ensure that demonstration of local support is a key material consideration in the decision-making process.
Communities in England are reassured that a proposed development will only succeed if it is in an area identified as suitable in a local plan and the planning impacts identified by the local community have been addressed and there is local support. Scottish communities have no such comfort. They should have and it is what the Petitions’ Committee recommends.
The response from the Scottish Government avoids the issue of strengthening the hands of local people, preferring instead to hide behind NPF4 which gives scant consideration to public opinion unless it supports government policy . Local place plans are nothing more than a wish list for local communities which will only come to fruition if they comply with NPF4. This is obvious from the Scottish Government’s response. “[…] we continue to ensure that local communities can have a meaningful say before decisions are made about their areas.”
There is no definition of what “meaningful” comprises or its significance in the planning process. Community consultations in Scotland are all too often a tick box exercise without meaning.
Who makes the decisions? The Petition requests that communities are allowed to have a greater say in development in their local area, not less.
In response to concerns raised at Holyrood over plans for Highly Protected Marine Areas, the new First Minister responded by saying:
“A very basic principle that we have always operated by, and I continue to reaffirm and confirm today, is that we are not going to impose these policies on communities that don’t want them. So we will work constructively with them.”
It seems that the views of coastal communities may be important but not the views of rural communities. This is inconsistent and unfair.
Both the UK Minister of State for Energy, Clean Growth and Climate Change and Secretary of State for Scotland have made it clear in their correspondence dated 5 and 8 August 2022, regarding this Petition, that “the UK Government is willing to engage with and have constructive conversations with the Scottish Government on planning matters” but it appears that the Scottish Government has no interest in doing so. The reasons are unknown. This part of the Scottish Government’s response is acutely disappointing.
Recommendation 3 – suggests further research into how support could be provided for communities wishing to participate in public inquiries into planning decisions, particularly those related to onshore windfarm.
We have outlined how this could be achieved in the Petitioner’s submission of 11 June 2021.
Four cost effective solutions are proposed.
- Advertise for, and constitute a Panel of contributory lawyers. Appointments would be for a maximum of two years.
- Make required public consultation meaningful, following provision of accurate and detailed information, with required/recorded public comment as required by the Scottish Government’s commitment to the Aarhus convention.
- Impose independent scrutiny by a legally qualified person of the content and manner of the public consultation exercise in each case, producing an independent report as part of the Environmental Report.
- Where requested, provide informed advocacy/legal assistance to community groups to help prepare for and participate in public inquiries or hearings.
These suggestions could be easily financed through an increase of planning application fees for major developments which are still much cheaper in Scotland than those in England.
RTPI’s submission of the 6 October 2021 agrees that planning fees should be increased.
Planning Aid Scotland’s submission of 6 October 2021 states that ”they recognise the challenges that community groups and members of the public experience in preparing for and participating in inquiries, especially in areas with multiple and/or repeat applications.”
Their submission of 9 August 2022 also confirms that “they would welcome the Scottish Government undertaking research into how support could be provided for communities participating in public inquiries (on windfarms and any other topic).”
Support is particularly important for people with hidden disabilities such as autism and dyslexia or those without adequate IT literacy or broadband provision. All such groups can experience communication difficulties but wish to take part. The Scottish Government is committed to equality in all areas; their vision being that individuals are respected, accepted and valued by their communities and have confidence in public services to treat them fairly. Planning inquiries should not be exempt.
An independent advocate appointed to protect and guide any member of the public who wants to give evidence at inquiries would generate greater participation in the planning process which is what the Government is seeking to achieve.
Without professional help for communities there is no level playing field. Those who can afford to pay for professional services will always have a better chance of having their voices heard while those who cannot pay will give up trying. This is simply not democracy.
Aileen Jackson
On behalf of Scotland Against Spin
26 April 2023
We will discuss at DPEA level but we need money up front to pay for help. Otherwise we will be left with only affluent areas being able to pay for professional help leading to some areas being worse impacted than others creating a further divide.
.
0 Comments