Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 6 April 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1119 contributions

|

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 March 2022

Paul Sweeney

I agree with that suggestion. There are provisions in the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 to place additional conditionality on operators to adhere to certain standards, whether the service is involved in a bus service improvement partnership, is subject to a franchise agreement—although I do not believe that a franchising scheme has yet been established in Scotland—or is in direct public ownership, which is the case with regard to City of Edinburgh Council-owned Lothian Buses. Therefore, I suggest that we ask the Scottish Government what scope there is to introduce conditionality on operators to adhere to standards that improve accessibility. Given the amount of public subsidy of the industry, the Government has significant leverage in that regard.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 March 2022

Paul Sweeney

This has been a very interesting discussion, because it is establishing where the balance lies between providing positive incentives for people to undertake best practice in management and ensuring that there are sufficient penalties for malpractice. I will be interested to hear witnesses’ views on where that balance should lie.

The petitioners presented an example from Argyll of a private landowner who had cleared 21m3 of ancient woodland and was reported to Forestry Scotland. An enforcement exercise was pursued, but apparently that has quietly been dropped. The penalty is something like £5,000 per tree felled—I think that that is the level of penalty that is levied. I am concerned that enforcement was not pursued for quite an egregious breach of the 2018 act. Is there a problem with enforcement?

The point was raised about public money being used to clean up other people’s mess. Do we have a perverse situation in which the community is cleaning up for private interests that profit from the land but do not contribute anything to cleaning up their contamination or bad practice?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 March 2022

Paul Sweeney

Do councils enforce tree preservation orders or are they a national thing? Can it be both?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 March 2022

Paul Sweeney

Should that be carried out on a national basis rather than being left to individual councils, which might have radically different attitudes?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 March 2022

Paul Sweeney

When the listed buildings system was first introduced, a national survey was done of all potential candidates and the list was compiled by experts at the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland. Does something similar have to happen for trees and woodlands? Is there also a role for public nominations of potential sites?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 March 2022

Paul Sweeney

Is there no enforcement of that?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 March 2022

Paul Sweeney

I would like some clarification. During opening remarks, there was consensus about the importance of Scotland’s ancient woodland. For the record, I am directing the question to the witnesses from NatureScot, Scottish Forestry and Confor. Do your organisations agree that the current protection regime is insufficient? I would like to have the answer explicitly established and to hear each of you agree or disagree.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 March 2022

Paul Sweeney

Do your organisations agree that the current protections are inadequate? That is the nub of the petitioner’s issue.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 March 2022

Paul Sweeney

Yes—that was very helpful.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 March 2022

Paul Sweeney

That is helpful. The issue with restocking is that, if someone has felled a load of trees that have been around for centuries, it will take another 100 years for the landscape to recover. It feels like the damage is done permanently, at least in a human’s lifetime.