Seòmar agus comataidhean

We also heard concerns from planning authorities about the interpretation of policy 5 on soils and policy 22 on flooding, which you mentioned. The concern is that very strict interpretation might prevent the deployment of innovative mitigation measures that communities seek. Is the Government aware of those concerns, even at this early stage? Could the Government further engage on that issue?

My question is about the level 4 budget that was discussed a minute or so ago. That budget proposal is in two parts. The capital allocation cut comes principally from the UK Government’s block grant cut, but the same table shows that there is a 39 per cent increase in the Scottish Government’s planning resource budget, from about £4.7 million up to about £6.6 million, so there are two sides to the story. Minister, will you confirm that that is accurate?

Can they express what they think the successes have been, and will we see that kind of stuff coming through to the committee, so that it is not just agencies and organisations that are telling us that the framework is working well but communities themselves?

I will follow up on that with a question for the minister, Andy Kinnaird or Fiona Simpson. I have a local constituency issue in which residents are facing the erosion of riverbanks that adjoin their property. Will the new arrangements and the new thinking assist local people to better deal with that? Up until now, they have been unable to deal with it or to gain permissions from whatever bodies are in place to help to protect their properties from erosion due to the effects of climate change. I hope that the arrangements in the new framework will allow local residents to take action where previously they were unable to do so. Is that the feeling that you get, minister?

Thank you very much.

Good morning, minister and colleagues.

Ivan, on the updated delivery programme, which you referred to in your opening remarks, we all know that it is very early days, but plenty of documents and working groups have been established—which is an inevitable requirement as we deliver a huge programme such as this. Will you say a wee bit more about how the Government plans to monitor outcomes and impact, and so on? We are always very interested in the positive benefits that programmes such as NPF4 can deliver. Could you shift our thinking a little more towards how we will report on the outcomes and benefits that we see from NPF4?

In the spirit of NPF4, is there a place for communities to articulate and express what they think?

We have touched on the fact that one of the six spatial principles is rural revitalisation. Claire Daly talked from Sustrans’s point of view about making town centre urban developments accessible so that we do not need cars, but what about rural settings? I would appreciate a few comments about that. Is NPF4 strong enough to support and encourage sustainable rural development, and particularly community-led housing?

Morag, do you want to come in on the question of how we are embracing the six principles in NPF4, for instance, local living and rural revitalisation? Are we beginning to see them being embraced by local communities and authorities?

Morag, something that you said earlier really struck me. When you were talking about just transition, you referred to the coal mining era and what happened in Scotland in the 1980s and you compared that with the just transition in the north-east that we are experiencing. There was no just transition in the 1980s. It was basically a “like it or lump it” transition, was it not? Words like “local place plan” were not in the lexicon then for many communities in Scotland. We just did not think in that way. I am glad that we are now using that language.

I would like to get some final thoughts from all of you about how local place plans are developing. Are they working? Are they beginning to work? Are we seeing the fruits of those plans? Can I get some ideas from you on that? I ask Morag to comment first, as I mentioned her.