Seòmar agus comataidhean

Any planning system must ensure that the balance is right and that, where development is taking place, all the different factors are considered. We have opened that up by discussing biodiversity and environmental aspects, and NPF4 covers many other aspects, such as infrastructure and the consideration of brownfield sites. All that is considered in the planning system. When there are specific issues—you mentioned policy 22 on flooding, which is one of the policies that are being considered—the issuing of guidance and letters from me and the chief planner to offer clarification to planning authorities, when required, is an important part of the process.

I go back to the point that policies must be designed in such a way that they are applicable across the country. Local planning authorities must take into account local considerations when they look at how they apply policies. That is precisely why there is no hierarchy, because different factors could be more or less important in different parts of the country, and local planning authorities need to make such decisions.

As I said, guidance is issued as necessary to support the process when there are concerns that local authorities are not interpreting the policies in the round. That will feed into the process, and we can give more guidance through planning letters and other mechanisms to offer clarification.

Mechanisms are already in place to support the use of vacant and derelict land, although that depends on the specifics of the site, and local authorities have a big part to play, because it depends on what they see as priorities. Funding streams are in place for that. We are also looking at whether there is scope to implement other measures that would encourage brownfield site use. Where there is scope to do so, we are open to considering such measures to deliver exactly what you outlined.

Quite a bit of work has been done on that. We want to design places that support everyone who uses them, across genders. If we get that right, it has a positive effect on everybody who uses the space.

As I said, quite a bit of work is happening on that with representatives from the United Nations Institute for Training and Research, including research fellow Dr May East. I have also been involved in events with young planners where the gender-sensitive approach to planning has been given significant prominence. Young planners are very interested in that, because they see that it adds value to the place-making aspect of what they do and part of the reason that they came into planning is to make places better.

It certainly got prominence in our discussions, and it was embedded through NPF4. We are taking the opportunity to work with others on that, and to articulate it where we can.

Conceptually, the plan is for the hub to be able to leverage resources to address and unblock specific issues. The hub contains a range of elements, and it is important to recognise that they are trying to solve different problems in different sectors.

On housing, as we talked about, we have to identify stalled sites where there are specific blockages. We then need to get the right people around the table to unblock those and move them forward. Before there was a hub, everyone would be talking from their own script about why they were doing what they were doing in their part of the process, but the hubs hook all that together. Having them has added value, as they bring everyone around the table to identify how, as a collective, they can help to unblock some of the stalled sites. The housing planning hub has been quite significant, and we will continue to roll that work out to more sites.

In hydrogen, in the areas where we are rolling out the hub, we want to get ahead of the curve and understand the issues that will be pertinent to that technology as it comes into play. That technology is new to everybody, and smaller local authorities will find it more difficult to access the technical information and expertise to do that. We therefore want to address some of the issues with it up front, so that we are not learning as those applications start to come through because we will have done a lot of the learning previously. We want to identify the specialist technical resource that can support those planning applications. We are doing similar work on renewable energy. The concept has been very well received, and the execution of it has landed well, so we will continue to develop it.

On the point about how that will be resourced, we are in a learning phase just now, and we are making a difference. As we go into the next parliamentary term, we will assess that in the round and talk to stakeholders so that we can understand whether we need more investment in specific activities that the hub is carrying out in order to make a material difference.

SEPA’s remit is not in my ministerial portfolio—it is elsewhere—but if you want to communicate with me on the specifics of the case, we can look at SEPA’s assessment and the technical data that it used to make it.

It is not my portfolio and I am not aware of that specific fund but, if funds are available—from whatever source—that can help to support communities, I would encourage local authorities to access them to invest in place plans or other activities.

More broadly, we have done quite a bit of work to review and understand the work that the UK Government is doing. A number of categories are not relevant in a Scottish context, because we have already taken steps to address them, or because they do not apply. We have already done some things in Scotland, such as the improvements that we have made through NPF4 and other activities. We are looking at other things that are being done down south to see whether there is anything that we can learn from them. We are very open to taking that forward.

I do not know whether anyone is aware of the specific fund that the convener mentioned?

No, I do not think that we need to change NPF4.

We have just had a conversation on biodiversity and environmental aspects. There is a wide range of policies in NPF4 and, as I have indicated, there is no hierarchy, so it depends on the situation, the proposal and the local circumstances. The planning authority will take a view as to whether it will grant planning permission and what conditions it will put on that. The housing emergency is obviously a factor in those decisions.

The chief planner and I have written to planning authorities to highlight that there is a housing emergency across the country and, in many local authorities, that is a consideration. Given the stage that we are at, however, it is all about delivery. It is about taking the existing policy, which went through the Parliament, and the guidelines that sit around about it—the letters from myself and the chief planner to clarify any aspects—and delivering the system.

I will let officials talk to the specifics on ancient woodlands but, in general, the policies are clear in national planning framework 4, which covers all the aspects that would be considered by a planning authority. The guidance supplements NPF4 for specific issues that come up, which the authority then applies. The guidance is there for planning professionals and the planning authorities to use when they make their determinations.

Cara, is there anything to say on ancient woodlands?

The 110,000 homes target is over a 10-year period, so that is only part of the picture. That target covers just affordable homes, not all homes, and it averages out at 11,000 a year. As I said, about 20,000 homes are getting built at the moment. The housing needs demand assessment and the MATHLR process, which builds on that assessment, led to the number of 197,000 over a 10-year period.

As I have indicated, NPF4 is not a blockage to that happening. Significantly more houses are being given planning permission each year than are being built, and a significant number of houses that have already been given planning permission are not being built. We accept that there are other challenges. A lot of our work on stalled sites and our proactive work with the sector and others is to address those challenges, but that is not because NPF4 is stopping planning permission being given for houses.

I have said that it is a high-level estimate, and that is on the record. I have said that before.