Seòmar agus comataidhean

Planning Aid Scotland submission of 6 October 2021

PE1864/AAAAA - Increase the ability of communities to influence planning decisions for onshore windfarms

PAS (www.pas.org.uk) is an impartial charity and social enterprise that helps people in Scotland to engage with the planning system and their places. Community engagement is a key aspect of enhancing local democracy and empowering communities to ensure that Scotland is a fairer and more equal place. PAS provides – amongst other services – an advice service, training, youth engagement, and facilitation of community-led plans.

PAS welcomes the invitation to respond to this petition.

Response to Point 1: Adopting English planning legislation for the determination of onshore wind farm developments

• As an impartial organisation, PAS does not comment on policy approaches to renewable energy.

• It may be useful for the committee to hear an English local authority perspective on the application of the current policy approach as set out in the petition, and to understand how community approval or otherwise of onshore windfarm proposals is assessed.

• PAS understands that Scotland is the only devolved UK nation requiring inquiries for certain onshore windfarm appeals. It may be useful for the committee to hear a DPEA perspective on this matter. Is an inquiry the best approach to examining matters such as visual impact where parties will often already have fixed positions? Might a hearing or written submissions be more effective? Could mediation be introduced as part of the process?

• It could also be investigated whether existing legislation and procedure (eg, the EIA regulations) could be amended to ensure members of the public and community groups are notified earlier in the process about section 36 applications (in effect creating closer alignment with the planning application process).

Response to Point 2: Empowering local authorities to ensure local communities are given sufficient professional help to engage in the planning process

• PAS recognises 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.

• The PAS free and impartial advice service (delivered by a combination of staff and PAS volunteers – all chartered planners) receives over 1000 enquiries annually and advice is provided for any eligible enquiry. PAS is also a referral agency to the Faculty of Advocates Free Legal Services Unit, meaning that users of our advice service can request pro bono legal support (written advice, representation or mediation). In addition, PAS has delivered training sessions for community groups in areas experiencing a high volume of windfarm applications.

• Advising members of the public or community groups involved in an inquiry is inevitably one of the most challenging enquiry types received by the PAS advice service, both in terms of the potential volume of material to review, and the potential time input required.

• PAS believes that there is scope for the committee to further investigate the establishment of a formal scheme whereby support would be offered to individuals or community groups participating in inquiries. The legal profession may be interested in supporting such a scheme, perhaps through the Faculty of Advocates or the Law Society of Scotland. The DPEA and local authorities might also have an interest in helping provide this support.

If such a scheme were to be established, it should be universal - open to participants in all types and topic of inquiry - and not restricted to those opposing onshore windfarm applications.

Response to Point 3: Appointing an independent advocate to ensure that local participants are not bullied and intimidated during public inquiries

• PAS recognises that appearing at inquiry can be an intimidating experience, particularly as a member of the public facing cross examination.

• However, if reporters are trained to recognise bullying and to intervene at the correct time, PAS does not currently consider that introducing a further layer of personnel in the form of an independent advocate should need to be added to the inquiry process.

• It may be useful for the committee to understand how reporters are trained to recognise and deal with potential bullying, and if appropriate, for the DPEA to review training and reference materials. The DPEA complaints process already exists as a recourse for investigation of procedural matters.

• A potential support scheme – as referenced above - should be designed to help inquiry participants to understand what to expect and how to manage cross examination.

• The petition itself does not provide direct examples of bullying. A range of public comments submitted refer to bullying but often appear to be anecdotal rather than specific (n.b. PAS has not reviewed every public submission, so there may indeed be specific descriptions of bullying). The committee may wish to seek more detailed testimonies from those who believe they have experienced bullying to help determine potential further actions. It may also be useful for the committee to hear from the DPEA on this matter.