Seòmar agus comataidhean

Finally, I want to ask about free public transport. Mr Sweeney has been vocal on that issue and I am sure that he will have questions on it, too. However, I have a specific question on the introduction of free public transport for those who are seeking asylum and those with refugee status. It is important that that free transport is not restricted to Ukrainian people but is available to people from around the world. A confirmation that you are considering eligibility for free travel would be useful.

I hope that this is unjustified, but there is also a concern that the Home Office might attempt to claw back money from people who get such universal free benefits. Can you confirm whether that concern is justified? I hope that it is not.

How responsive is the plan to changing Government policy or changing circumstances? We now have, for example, a massively ambitious heat in buildings strategy, although inevitably there are questions around its delivery. Does that not provide quite a new context in which the plan should be reconsidered?

I will move on to permitted development rights. Do you have views about how, or whether, permitted development rights should be extended in certain areas? If you think that they should be extended, how would that relate to policies to protect the historic environment?

I get a lot of constituents contacting me who live in conservation areas and who are struggling with decisions around whether their double glazing should be 3mm or 6mm thick and on issues about astragals and windows, and all the rest of it. They feel that getting planning approval to upgrade their homes in historic areas can be a bit of a minefield. Do you have thoughts about particular categories of permitted development? Where should we draw the line in protecting the historic environment? Those are two big issues. I will start with Robbie Calvert. What are your general thoughts on that?

Jane, do you want to add anything?

Good morning to you all. First of all, I want to ask Chris Brodie about the “Climate Emergency Skills Action Plan 2020-2025”. Obviously, the plan has a longer-term outlook—over the next 25 years, I think—but it specifically relates to the period from 2020 to 2025. Now that we are coming up to its midpoint, can you tell us how the plan will be evaluated? How will you know whether it has been successful in delivering its climate objectives?

I am sure that, as a former planner, you caught some of the previous evidence session this morning. When I looked through the action plan, I found only one reference to planning and planning jobs, which was in a list of potential areas for skills development. There did not seem to be a particular focus on planning and planners. Do you recognise that that needs to change, particularly given the amount of infrastructure we will need to build, the amount of place making that we will need to do and the other changes that are going to be needed in communities?

Thank you. My final question is for Jamie Brogan. You are working on developing partnerships with local authorities to tackle climate change and I imagine that there will be some big areas there around heating and energy, alongside transport.

Who do you see as being the biggest partners for local authorities to engage with? Where is that big workforce for delivery going to come from? Thinking about energy, are the utility companies going to come in and do street-to-street retrofitting, investing in district heating schemes, installing household insulation and whatever? Where is the big workforce? When I look at housing departments in local councils, I do not see a vast workforce to be deployed to retrofit and change entire communities. Where is the partnership? Where is the bulk of that workforce in, say, an area such as energy that can engage in partnership working with councils to make the shift to net zero?

I have a number of quite specific issues to ask about. The first is on full cost recovery for development management functions. Given the funding difficulties that planning departments have at the moment, where do you see full cost recovery sitting, and how do you think that that can be delivered equitably between minor and major applications? I will start with Pam Ewen.

The engagement work with LDPs is critical to them getting the right development applications later on.

Jane, do you have anything that you would like to add to those points?