Seòmar agus comataidhean

That is interesting. The local authority in my area revised its numbers upwards, which was to do with Covid in-migration. Flexibility must be looked at in relation to all such issues.

In its submission to the committee, Planning Democracy asserts that there seems to be no rationale behind the flexibility and that the figures sometimes amount to approximately

“77% over and above the Housing Needs and Demand Assessment”

figures. It is concerned that that will give rise to speculative house building throughout Scotland. How do you respond to that?

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests—I am a councillor on East Ayrshire Council.

Before I ask my question, I would like to revisit community benefits, briefly. Will NPF4 and any guidance help local authorities to zoom out of the picture when there are multiple applications for house building in a specific area? How can councils ensure that they make best use of developer contributions? Sometimes, there are multiple applications for thousands of houses in a very small space from different applicants. I am concerned that, sometimes, that does not translate into the best use of the contributions.

Thank you for that. Policy 4 states:

“Planning should respect, protect and fulfil human rights, seek to eliminate discrimination and promote equality.”

As a councillor, I know that those are outcomes that councillors have policies and plans to promote. Could you explain what it means in practice for planning officers and councillors on planning committees? It is perhaps not something that is at the forefront of their minds when taking planning decisions—they may not think that it is a material consideration.

On the language that is used, where it says “should”, is that the same as “must”? Perhaps Andy Kinnaird could pick up on that.

One of the stated aims in the draft national planning framework 4 is that it wants to

“support the delivery of high quality, sustainable homes that meet the needs of people throughout their lives.”

Fiona Simpson mentioned the minimum all-tenure housing land requirements. How do those differ from the arrangements that are already in place?

Thanks very much for that.

Just to pick up on a little point before I hand back to the convener, does the NPF seek to put equalities on a level playing field with all the other material considerations in training and skills development for those on planning committees and for the planners in council departments? Should that be brought up more strongly with councillors on planning committees when they are taking a decision? I am trying to understand how it will work in practice for those who are taking the decisions.

Great stuff. Thank you very much for that.

Yes, it helps, Fiona. I have a further question on that. Some rural local authorities—I am thinking specifically of the two that my constituency covers—have commented that the HNDA figures are based on current population but the pandemic has given rise to people seeking to move back into places such as Ayrshire, where depopulation happened previously. Does the flexibility allow for that type of change and reflect the number of houses that are required that we perhaps did not think were required in the past?

Thank you, convener, and welcome, Paul. I have a quick question on the cross-CPG working that could perhaps happen. I am a member of the cross-party group on recreational boating and marine tourism, as is Stuart McMillan, who I note is on the membership list for your proposed CPG. Will there be plans to ensure that, where we can, we dovetail and work together? Do you anticipate that that will happen?

For the consideration of this agenda item, I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests, as I am still a sitting councillor in East Ayrshire Council.