Seòmar agus comataidhean

We are discussing delivery plans and monitoring, but we went very specifically into the ancient woodland area. Bruce Watson has indicated that he wanted to come in, so I will bring him in to speak to that point and pick up on Paul McLennan’s questions about the delivery programme and monitoring.

That brings to an end our questions for this panel. Thank you for being with us this morning and sharing your views. It has been a most important conversation and I think it needed that little bit of extra time to draw the views out.

We now welcome our final panel of witnesses. We are joined by Dr Caroline Brown, assistant professor of environmental planning and healthy environments at the urban institute at Heriot-Watt University, and Professor Cliff Hague, who is a chartered town planner and chair of the Cockburn Association. I welcome you both warmly. It has been a long morning, but this is such an important conversation. I will begin with the same questions that I put to the previous witnesses. I would love to hear you briefly outline your views on the key changes that have been made in the revised national planning framework.

Thank you very much for those answers. Please do not shut up, because we are hearing new things from you, which I think is important.

Professor Hague, you have just touched on the climate and nature crises, and I want to ask you perhaps more of a question on planning that I think phased a few folks on the previous panels when I put it to them. In practical terms, what does the requirement for decision makers to give significant weight to the global climate and nature crises mean for development management and development planning across Scotland?

Item 3 on our agenda is to consider a Scottish statutory instrument. As it is a negative instrument, there is no requirement for the committee to make any recommendation on it. Members will note that the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee reported the instrument to the Parliament on the grounds that it failed to comply with laying requirements in terms of timings. However, the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee was content with the Scottish Government’s explanation of the reasons for that breach.

As members have no comments, are we agreed that we do not wish to make any recommendations in relation to the instrument?

Members indicated agreement.

What was the rationale for taking a different approach to the number of dogs when it comes to rough shooting compared with other types of hunting with dogs? If the rationale was to improve workability, the approach seems unnecessary, according to the Wild Animal Welfare Committee. I would like to hear your response to its statement that

“Section 6(2)(c)”

of the bill as drafted

“takes a proportionate approach in requiring the person to take reasonable steps to ensure that a dog does not join with others to form a pack: it should be possible for anyone in this situation to demonstrate that such steps had been taken. A genuinely accidental or unintended situation is unlikely to be viewed as an offence”.

It sounds to me as though that section of the bill is workable, but I would welcome your opinion on that.

I agree in principle, but I think that we are none the wiser, and we almost need a back to basics understanding of legal language. I feel like I need to go back and look at the Official Report, because, at some point early on, in answer to question 3, the witnesses started saying that it is about two dogs per activity. We are talking about shooters and all sorts of things—

I know, but if, after hearing from the bill team, we do not get that it is per activity and we are not clear, I do not know that inviting a whole load of other people in will make things clearer. I know that the majority of members will say, “Let’s do it,” and I will go with the majority, but I do not know whether that will give us what we need. We have spent a lot of time on the issue already.

I would suggest writing a letter to the Scottish Government requesting further information, including a consultation timeline and the specifics of the proposed consultation on extending the framework for licensing of activities involving animals, including greyhound racing. I would also be interested in writing to the Dogs Trust, the Blue Cross and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals to request an estimated publication date of their upcoming evidence-based report.

Good morning, and welcome to the 28th meeting in 2022 of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee. I ask all members and witnesses to ensure that their mobile phones are on silent and that all other notifications are turned off.

The first item on our agenda is to decide whether to take items 4 and 5 in private. Do members agree to take those items in private?

Members indicated agreement.