Official Report 1012KB pdf
The final item of business this evening is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-16389, in the name of Fulton MacGregor, on the northern corridor community forum’s evidence-based report.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament acknowledges the publication of the 2024 Northern Corridor Community Forum’s publication, Northern Corridor Community Forum - Evidence Based Report, which, it believes, offers a comprehensive statistical and literary analysis of the challenges facing the Northern Corridor area in North Lanarkshire, encompassing the communities of Glenboig, Gartcosh, Moodiesburn, Chryston, Stepps and Muirhead; commends the report for its detailed findings on critical issues such as housing, economic development, infrastructure, local amenities and community wellbeing; notes the report’s identification of what the authors see as the urgent need for modernised and enhanced infrastructure to support these communities; understands that, while the area is open to appropriate new housing developments, there is significant concern about the unprecedented scale of private housing projects, which threaten the long-term sustainability of the communities; notes the report’s call for a more constructive and collaborative relationship between the Community Forum and North Lanarkshire Council to rebuild democratic trust and ensure that local decision-making reflects the needs, desires and plans of the people who live and work in the area, and further notes the view that implementing the report’s recommendations will prioritise actions to foster inclusive economic growth, improve accountability in local governance and enhance the living and working conditions for residents and workers across the Northern Corridor.
17:32
I thank all the members across the Parliament who supported my motion, which has allowed it to be discussed in the chamber this evening. The topic of the debate concerns a region in North Lanarkshire that covers about one third of my constituency of Coatbridge and Chryston. The several small towns and villages in the area, which include Stepps, Muirhead, Chryston, Auchinloch, Moodiesburn, Mollinsburn, Glenboig and Gartcosh, are collectively referred to as the northern corridor. The northern corridor community forum is an organisation of people in the area who share their time, skills, expertise and knowledge in an ethos of mutual support among all community organisations across the region.
Last year, the northern corridor community forum compiled a report, which sought to investigate and analyse data related to housing, education, infrastructure, amenities and transport, and how the various areas may be facing pressures in the face of rapid population growth across the corridor. This evening, I will comment on the conclusions of the report and on the sentiments of the constituents who live along the northern corridor.
To some, this debate might seem parochial, but it is the duty of every MSP to represent their constituents and ensure that their voices are heard here in their Parliament. The issues that the NCCF raises are similar issues to those on which colleagues across Scotland might receive correspondence if they represent a constituency or region that has experienced rapid population growth.
Ultimately, the report concludes that communities across the northern corridor have been and will continue to be overwhelmed by a series of negative impacts that arise from overdevelopment and associated population increases. I wish to express on the record that the report was keen to stress that the NCCF is not averse to increased housing development in the area. However, it has consistently raised its concerns over the sustainability of increased housing development and the effect that it will have on the communities, which I am sure we can all relate to.
To examine some of the concerns of the NCCF, we can scrutinise census data from 2021. It was reported that the total population of the collection of villages that make up the northern corridor was just short of 30,000 people. That makes the corridor home to more people than those reported to be living in places such as Bellshill, Kilsyth or Shotts, and it gives a population comparable with that of Wishaw or even Motherwell. However, by the very nature of being a collection of villages, unlike the previously mentioned towns, the corridor does not have a physical town centre, which means that there is a lack of town models, action plans or strategies for the northern corridor as a whole.
For members of the forum and other residents in the area, there is a feeling that their areas often fall through the cracks. On paper, their homes are part of a network of villages, and the amenities and infrastructure reflect that. The reality is that the region is now one of the fastest-growing areas in the central belt, and planning must consider the corridor as a single entity, instead of a patchwork of rural villages.
It is that point that perhaps causes the most frustration in the communities. I will not list each individual infrastructural and facility-based complaint that the forum has raised over the years; for residents, there is the draining experience of having to contact a myriad of bodies each time they feel that there is a problem that needs to be addressed. For example, one accessible train station may be acceptable for a small network of villages, but not for a rapidly growing region of urban sprawl. The number of crossing points and roads around villages may be adequate for lower populations, but a lack of crossing points has made the corridor more hazardous for pupils and other pedestrians in the area during congested times around school hours. The number of buses that serve the area would be sufficient for a rural region, but the services are currently very much lacking for a region with nearly 30,000 people.
Those are three transport-related issues and, in order for anything to change, they would require lengthy discussions with separate bodies. They are all issues that I have advocated for on behalf of my constituents—and that is not even touching on the amount of similarly intricate cases that I have taken regarding the provision of health, education and leisure centres and facilities. It is second nature to address those issues in established towns, but not so much for areas that, on paper, appear to be a handful of villages.
Late last year, we learned that Scotland’s population is rising at the highest rate since the 1940s. Higher populations will require more infrastructure, more facilities and more thoughtful planning. Although the motion concerns one specific area of one specific local authority, it is important for members from all constituencies and regions to engage in the processes to ensure that their views are heard about the direction in which they would like their communities to go. The points that I have touched on today are issues that I am sure other members have dealt with in their regions, and I look forward to hearing further contributions from my colleagues across the chamber.
I know that residents in the northern corridor will be keenly interested to hear how the Scottish Government will take on board the report and give reassurances to the communities that their views will be listened to when future planning decisions are made. Steps such as introducing provisions for pre-development community asset and infrastructure audits when an area is identified as being able to accommodate large-scale urban growth would encourage sustainable growth with minimal effects on existing communities. Likewise, introducing protections for areas that are considered by their communities to be high-value scenic assets and to be at risk from the merging of communities would safeguard areas that are prized by their residents and would ensure that they are not lost. Ways could be sought to give community boards more powers to raise their concerns. Those boards have specialised local knowledge of their communities, and their views should certainly be valued when decisions are being made.
Although the report’s recommendations are specific in their nature, it all boils down to ensuring that residents of communities are given the opportunity to have a meaningful say in how their communities are developed. We all know that further development is necessary in light of an increasing Scottish population, but we must find a way to address the concerns of many people in rural areas that development will be imposed on smaller communities with little to no consultation. The Scottish Government and local authorities need to address that sentiment in future planning. I will be interested to hear the minister’s response to some of those concerns, either in summing up or in writing at a later date.
The work and diligence of the members of the forum have already resulted in petitions being taken through the Parliament, correspondence with ministers, round tables, meetings with the planning improvement champion, motions recognising forum members’ civic leadership, and now a debate here in the Holyrood chamber. It is fair to say that they have engaged with nearly every civic lever available to them, in the Parliament and beyond.
I again thank members of the NCCF for compiling the report, which has given a voice to people in the northern corridor who care about their neighbourhoods. The motion was lodged to recognise and commend the steady commitment that forum members have made to their community for as long as I have been an MSP, which is coming up for nine years now. The forum has far too many members for me to mention all their names, but they include Isobel Kelly, Alice Morton, Cathy McGinty and Brandon Williams.
I reiterate the need to ensure that planners take rural communities into account, especially when such communities experience rapid and unprecedented population growth in what are mostly urban areas.
17:40
I congratulate Fulton MacGregor on securing this important debate and bringing it to the chamber. I also congratulate the northern corridor community forum, which undertook a lot of work in compiling its report, with the aim of making changes for the better in its community.
All members can support this issue and get around it. Our constituents’ voices matter, whether or not they are in community forum groups such as the NCCF, many of which have put together concerning statistics on lack of infrastructure and other issues that I will come to shortly.
The NCCF’s report shows that people are passionate about the areas in which they live—they care deeply about them. Fulton MacGregor is passionate about the area that he represents, and he has raised local issues in the chamber time and time again. We can share that approach across the parties. I would love to have seen a copy of the forum’s report before this evening’s debate, but I was not able to find it online. I have had direct conversations with Fulton MacGregor, but I am keen to have further discussions offline, to see whether there is a cross-party way forward in which we could examine and address the issue collectively, as MSPs who represent the same area.
In preparing for the debate, I reflected on my time as a councillor in North Lanarkshire. I fondly remember discussing the northern corridor at that time, when a range of unique problems affected communities in the area. Fulton MacGregor hit the nail on the head: many such problems are down to population growth. The number of people coming into the area through new housing development undoubtedly places pressures on infrastructure, healthcare and education, and affects people’s ability simply to get down to local shops, for example. We must ensure that we have the right infrastructure in place for each area.
I was struck by the transport issues that Fulton MacGregor raised, regarding accessibility to train stations and the lack of bus services in the area. Such issues are not unique to the northern corridor or to North Lanarkshire. However, the Scottish Government must refocus its efforts. Local people must be able to get into and out of the areas in which they live or work, but we must also be aware of the impact of the journey to net zero and achieving an affordable just transition, on which I am sure all members are focused.
I was pleased to hear that the forum is not against housing development, but that it wants a sensible and pragmatic approach to how such development comes into the area. It must come with the right infrastructure, otherwise it will not work. Roughly 14,000 people are on social housing waiting lists across North Lanarkshire. It is acknowledged that we have a housing issue in the area, and we must do something to address that collectively—not only local MSPs but North Lanarkshire councillors.
One way of doing so would be to explore using brownfield sites instead of encroaching on villages that have a lot of green belt. North Lanarkshire Council’s area is rich in brownfield sites—I think that it has roughly half of the available brownfield sites in Scotland. We should pursue that to take pressure off villages that cannot cope with the substantial housing developments that come to their area.
I agree with Meghan Gallacher’s point. Does she agree that the issue is that green-belt sites are more attractive to developers than brownfield sites are? Do we need to do more in that space so that builders want to build on brownfield sites?
Fulton MacGregor read my mind. There are ways to address that issue. For example, a system is available in England, but not currently in Scotland, that allows developers to tap into grants to treat the land on brownfield sites. The aim is to make those sites more attractive. That might help with some of the issues that the member rightly raises.
I am well over time, and I do not want to take up the full debate, so I will stop there. I conclude by congratulating Fulton MacGregor on bringing the debate to the chamber and the community forum on its hard work. I look forward to reading the report in full when I get the opportunity.
17:45
I, too, thank Fulton MacGregor for bringing the debate to the chamber. He mentioned that some people might see the debate as parochial and niche, but his and Meghan Gallacher’s points about how important it is that MSPs represent their constituents, first and foremost, and about community involvement in decision making, were well made. I concur with the sentiments of those members.
The beauty of some of our members’ business debates is that we discuss the niche interests of our communities and tangible issues impacting our constituents that might not otherwise get attention. I confess that, as the MSP for Motherwell and Wishaw, I am only adjacent to the northern corridor community, but, as a former North Lanarkshire councillor, I very much remember some of that community’s challenges. I pay tribute to the volunteers who take part in community forums and in the partnerships around North Lanarkshire, and to the community council volunteers who work so hard for their communities in ensuring that the voice of their community is heard in decisions that are taken about them.
We face huge demographic challenges, with an ageing population, in Scotland. We need to encourage population growth in order to maintain a tax base, protect and enhance our public services and bring the rich benefits of migration to Scotland. Those demographic challenges are real and immediate, and they demand our collective attention.
It is interesting that issues that are perceived as being particular to communities due to overdevelopment can have such a strong impact on those communities. The points made by the northern corridor community forum resonate with me following the proposed change to the boundaries in North Lanarkshire. I might well have represented the northern corridor at one point, based on the Scottish Boundary Commission proposals that were made. That decision would have taken parts of the Airdrie and Shotts constituency into my constituency, completely ignoring the fact that a motorway runs across that area. People who rely on public transport such as train services would have had to have gone through Motherwell and back again to get to see an MSP or MP based in Airdrie, although, geographically, they are very close. That is why we have to be cognisant of what makes a community, how communities have grown together and the geographical and community-based boundaries in our constituencies.
I am very pleased that the issue has been brought to the attention of the Parliament. I was born in Motherwell and grew up in Wishaw, and I am intimately familiar with the links between those close communities and our challenges. A major infrastructure road is about to go through the centre of Motherwell, which will have an impact on residents while it is being developed. It will change some of the locations that form communities in my area, given that a major trunk road will link the M74 and the M8 through the constituency. All those things have an impact.
The most important thing is that the communities that are impacted have a voice, and not just in their community forum. I commend the work that has been done in the report and by the council, but those communities also have a voice in the Parliament, because, as elected representatives, we are able to represent our communities.
17:50
I congratulate Fulton MacGregor on securing the debate, and I thank members in the chamber for their contributions. I recognise the work of the northern corridor community forum in raising these substantive issues and the way in which those who are involved in the forum are working together. I echo the comments that members have made: although the debate focuses on a very specific geographical area, the issues that are raised are applicable to all our communities. We have a reflexive relationship with our communities—we are shaped by them and, as active citizens, we play a role in shaping them, which will, in turn, shape generations to come.
I turn to the substance of the matters that are being considered this evening. As members will appreciate, it would not be appropriate for the Scottish Government to endorse any particular view or position on, for example, a local development plan. It is for the planning authority to take into account all the views and evidence that have been submitted to it as it prepares its local development plan.
Our “Scottish Government Planning Guidance: Effective Community Engagement in Local Development Plans—People and planning”, on good practice in community engagement, makes it clear that
“Planning authorities should involve communities in the creation of the Evidence Report”,
and the report that we are considering this evening shows that communities are keen to engage.
I understand that work is on-going by North Lanarkshire Council to prepare the evidence report, which precedes the preparation of the new local development plan for the area. Therefore, I cannot comment on the substance of the report that we are discussing, as the evidence report that the council prepares will be subject to independent scrutiny later this year by Scottish Government reporters.
This debate has been important. We need to build more homes, as we are in a housing emergency, and one of the ways in which we can do that is by accelerating the regeneration of our towns and town centres. That would surely provide more living spaces, and there would be more areas in which developers could come in to build homes. That would create a new dynamic, taking pressure off the villages that Fulton MacGregor rightly mentioned in his opening speech. Is the minister steadfast in doing that to try to tackle the housing emergency?
Absolutely, and I recognise the sterling work that Meghan Gallacher has taken forward as convener of the cross-party group on towns and town centres. In partnership with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, the Government is engaged in substantive work on that very agenda through the town centre action plan forum. Indeed, there are active discussions on the topic across the Government, because we recognise that town centres provide a valuable opportunity for achieving a number of policy objectives, not only in housing through increasing the availability of residential units but because, in increasing the population density of our town centres, we support retail, hospitality and thriving places.
Last week, I had the opportunity to visit Motherwell, in Clare Adamson’s constituency, where I saw that, through a number of different funding streams backed by the Scottish Government, working in partnership with the local authority, the former YMCA building and an adjacent vacant site have been brought into use to provide valuable new residential accommodation. That is an example of town centre regeneration making a significant contribution towards addressing the housing emergency.
I want to offer a number of observations on the extensive work that the northern corridor community forum has undertaken, as it helps to illustrate the direction that our planning system has taken in recent years. First, the communities have acknowledged that our planning system has changed considerably in recent years, with the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 and the introduction of national planning framework 4, which I had the privilege of launching in February 2023. Two years on, we are seeing positive change from NPF4, with a recognition that there should be a plan-led approach to housing and infrastructure delivery rather than planning by appeal.
Secondly, the report under consideration this evening highlights the challenges with infrastructure that go hand in hand with providing new homes. The northern corridor communities have been clear that they support housing development, as we have heard, but they want, rightly, to ensure that homes are built in sustainable locations and are served by infrastructure and the facilities that people depend on day to day. NPF4’s policy 15, on “Local Living and 20 minute neighbourhoods”, supports that, recognising that places have to work for the people who live there. It is for planning authorities to work out what that looks like in different types of places, and that process can usefully be informed by feedback from communities, such as the report that we are considering this evening.
NPF4’s policy 18 also requires development plans to take
“an infrastructure first approach to”
development. It states that
“Plans should ... be informed by evidence on infrastructure capacity”
and “needs”, and that they should “set out requirements” for the future and “indicate” how developer contributions will be used to support delivery. That is not easy, but it is crucial that spatial strategies make best use of existing capacity as far as possible to minimise the financial impacts on both the public and private sectors. Planning authorities are working hard on that, but only time will tell how it plays out in practice.
Thirdly, the community forum report reflects the importance of place and the crucial role that people play in shaping their towns and neighbourhoods. Good planning depends on having a good understanding of what makes each place unique, and no one is better placed to explain that than local people. I welcome this debate because it highlights that it really is people who make the planning system work. Those communities have worked hard to gather views and evidence about their place, and they highlight challenges and opportunities that are at the heart of our planning system.
Local development plans have a tough job to do. They cannot please everyone, and, as the communities acknowledge, local authorities do not have limitless funding available to them for new facilities and infrastructure. Local development plans will, therefore, have to be realistic about what is possible and will need to find creative solutions to placemaking.
I thank Fulton MacGregor again for highlighting the importance of an inclusive approach to planning and placemaking. I also recognise the considerable thought, time and effort that the communities of the northern corridor have put into engaging with the planning process. Our planning system is designed to be inclusive—everyone should have an opportunity to contribute their views so that plans are based on sound information and insights from local people. I have no doubt that the community forum will continue to engage with the North Lanarkshire local development plan as it continues to take shape.
Meeting closed at 17:57.Air ais
Decision Time