Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you for those points. I agree with you; as peatland restoration grows in popularity and as we do what we need to do in forestry and planting, the pressure will mount on the folks who consider the applications. In these circumstances, I am absolutely confident that Scottish Forestry has the capacity to take on what it will be required to do. In fact, this approach will take some weight off the local authorities. Because in the interim period applicants were not required to apply to Forestry Scotland for a felling licence, the issue would have fallen to local authorities for consideration. This correction allows the matter to go back to Scottish Forestry, which I am confident can manage things.

Despite the delay, I would still like to make some opening remarks, just to give the committee an overview of our proposal.

Thank you for having me along to discuss the Forestry (Exemptions) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2021. The Forestry (Exemptions) (Scotland) Regulations 2019 set out the felling activities that can be carried out without a specific felling licence from the regulator, which in this case is Scottish Forestry.

The first proposed amendment to the regulations is to correct a minor typographical error in the definition of “statutory undertaker”, where the word “power” will be amended to “pier” as originally intended.

The second and more substantive amendment seeks to respond to an unintended consequence that has arisen from new planning regulations laid earlier this year that created a permitted development right for peatland restoration projects. If not corrected, it could potentially result in the tree-felling component of peatland restoration schemes not being given the full consideration and proper scrutiny by Scottish Forestry that is supposed to happen, and, at its worst, it could result in large-scale tree felling as part of a peatland restoration project without sustainable forest management principles being applied.

That unintended consequence was identified during the development of the PDR for peatland restoration, and the proposed response that we are laying before the committee today was agreed on as a pragmatic way of ensuring that sustainable forest management will be fully integrated with peatland restoration permitted development rights.

Applicants for peatland restoration schemes that propose deforestation are already required to obtain an environmental impact assessment from Scottish Forestry and to apply to the local authority for the permitted development right. The effect of this amendment will be that they will also need to apply to Scottish Forestry for felling permission. Such permission can be applied for at the same time as requesting the environmental impact assessment that I mentioned, and we would advise that that be done prior to applying to the local authority for the permitted development right. With regard to the planning period for a peatland restoration PDR, the process is a rigorous one, requiring in-depth surveys and data analysis, and I am comfortable that the process contains sufficient time to cover this additional step of obtaining a felling licence.

I do not want to speak for too long, so, in summary, Scottish Government policy, including Scottish Forestry policy, supports the restoration of peatlands involving deforestation where it can be shown that the change of land use is in line with public benefit and can produce a public good. The obvious example is emissions reduction, but there are others including biodiversity gain and community benefit.

I hope that that explains our proposals, and I am content to take members’ questions.