Cuiken Primary School Playing Field
The final item of business today is a members' business debate on motion S3M-2935, in the name of Christine Grahame, on Cuiken primary school and its playing field. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament notes with alarm that yet another primary school playing field, at Cuiken Primary in Penicuik, is under threat of development despite Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) 11 and the presumption against building on school playing fields; notes the objection of the Penicuik and District Community Council to this proposal, and believes that there should be centralised data on the current provision of school playing fields, including location and acreage, and that sportscotland would add benefit as a mandatory consultee in any development plans that impinge on school playing fields and public open spaces.
I am grateful for the opportunity to bring the motion to the chamber, not only because I want to publicise this particular issue, but because it will allow us to talk about the wider context of the failure of public engagement with the planning process—in this case, the responsibility for that failure can be laid at the door of Midlothian Council—and the appalling loss of playing space for Scotland's children at a time when childhood obesity is on the rise. It is predicted that, if trends continue, in a decade or so around 75 per cent of our children will be obese. The wider context also includes the fact that, as the Health and Sport Committee recently heard in evidence, two out of three adult Scots are "inactive".
It is coincidental that I convene the Parliament's Health and Sport Committee, whose evidence-taking sessions on pathways into sport are well under way. Our inquiry is concentrating on the provision, in terms of time and facilities, of physical activity for our primary school children. We have been told that, so far, only one local authority has met the target—set five years ago—of two hours of physical activity a week in primary schools. Quite frequently, the barrier has been the lack of facilities or the amount of time that is taken up by travelling to facilities, so outdoor playing fields are much to be valued. However, I learned in evidence this week that there is no specific data on the number of playing fields. I also learned during this week's committee meeting that Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Education does not consider that it is required to give an evaluation of a school's provision of physical education, although it provides an evaluation of a school's provision in relation to numeracy, literacy and so on. We were told that silence on PE meant that all was well, which we found to be an extraordinary statement. Would no comment on numeracy mean that all was well? Of course not.
What is happening at Penicuik? There is a worthy proposal to build a new school for the 200 or so pupils, and there is an equally worthy proposal to build social housing. However, there is also the less than worthy proposal to build the greater part of those developments on the outdoor playing field, which is the last primary school outdoor playing field in Penicuik.
When did parents learn of this proposal? When neighbour notices were issued. How did they react? By launching a petition, which should come before the Parliament and which currently has 90 signatures, and by assembling parent meetings to resist the proposal. What does the community council think? It is opposed to building on the playing field.
Due to the lodging of objections—there are currently 48 from the public alone—the decision on building on the playing field has been postponed. I believe that, belatedly, intimation was given to sportscotland and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, which both lodged objections.
The rising tide of local and agency objections might cause Midlothian Council to have a rethink, but that will not happen without a great deal of anxiety being caused to the parents and the local community and great efforts being made on their part, late in the day.
There are many questions for Midlothian Council—and, indeed, any other council that is bent on developing on school playing fields and other open spaces. What constitues appropriate consultation of the community on such developments? When should it take place? In the instance of open spaces, when should sportscotland be involved? What consideration was given to Scottish planning policy 11? What consideration has been given to the impact on the health and wellbeing of pupils, should the playing field be lost forever?
Scottish planning policies
"provide statements of the Scottish Government's policy on nationally important land use".
The key objectives of SPP 11 are:
"To protect and enhance open space … To ensure a strategic approach to open space … by requiring local authorities to undertake an open space audit and prepare an open space strategy for their area … To protect and support opportunities for sport and recreation".
Midlothian Council has failed on all counts. There are not even proposals for outdoor facilities for the new school that will be built adjacent to the old school if the current proposals proceed. In that case, outdoor facilities will be reduced to virtually nil. Midlothian Council cannot possibly have us accept that the site is the only one that is available for social housing, worthy though that is. If that were so, no more social housing could be built in Penicuik, which I very much doubt.
I started by talking about the state of our children's wellbeing and the future that lies ahead if we do not increase physical activity among children from the early years onwards. Gone are the days when children had the freedom and space of streets where no cars were parked and when they could run about from dawn to dusk. Nowadays, their fingers on a computer keyboard probably get more exercise than any other limbs. If we keep going in the same way, we shall have a nation of obese children who are vulnerable to diabetes and other ailments. Therefore, reversing the trend is an immediate and national necessity that will in many instances be delivered through local action.
For the council: it should review the plans, for which it will earn the thanks of parents and community leaders. For the Government: it is perhaps time to beef up the import of SPP 11 and to give it statutory clout. For the Minister for Schools and Skills, who will sum up in the debate: I respectfully suggest that an appraisal of the provision and standards of physical activity in schools should be made mandatory in school reports as a matter of urgency.
I am happy to take part in the debate, which Christine Grahame has brought to Parliament. Since last October and November, residents of Cuiken Terrace and Cuiken Bank in Penicuik in my constituency have been approaching me concerning the proposed development of social housing in Cuiken Terrace. Their concerns are valid and must be given full and proper consideration by Midlothian Council in the detailed planning process. As the local MSP, I expect that of the local authority, and have made representations on a number of points on behalf of constituents.
I will touch on those issues in a moment, but I wish to say first that since I was elected I have been careful, when constituents have approached me on matters to do with planning applications, to be honest with them and to state that I have no formal locus in determining planning applications. For five and a half years, I have sought to be careful in dealing with thousands of constituents with planning issues. That said, councillors and council officers have a duty and a job to do and I expect them to do it. Part of that job is to provide full and proper information and to give full and proper consideration to valid representations that are made to them.
In July last year, I made representations to Midlothian Council, on behalf of parents, regarding the diminution of Cuiken primary school's playing field. The reply that I received states:
"Cuiken Primary School site complies with the current Scottish Government regulations as a school site and this includes play area, garden areas and multi-use games areas as well as designed play areas for nursery and ASN pupils."
It goes on to state that surplus land has been released to the council's property investment account and concludes:
"As you will appreciate identifying suitable land for social housing is challenging and this area is surplus to the school's requirements."
That leads me directly on to the views of Penicuik community council on the use of the site in the context of the inquiry on the local plan. The community council's view, which had the support of residents, was that the site's inclusion in the local plan was inconsistent with national planning policy guideline 3 and the council's resource protection policy RP27, so development on open space in the area should not be permitted. The reason was that, inter alia, such development would result in the loss of an attractive landscape and an important local recreation area. Planners must certainly argue and demonstrate clearly that those considerations are consistent with the local plan. If that is not the case, it will not simply be the Minister for Schools and Skills who will take an interest; it will be her ministerial colleagues with responsibility for planning.
The community council's clearly argued view is that inclusion of the site in the local plan will set a precedent in the town. I appreciate that point. Equally, I appreciate the concerns of the many constituents who have been in touch with me about local safety. As someone who has worked with residents over the years on the safety of Cuiken Terrace and who has supported them in delivering road safety improvements, I know that that is a valid concern. In the autumn I contacted Lothian and Borders Police with regard to that issue.
On the wider issue of green areas and playing space for primary schools, I will start with Penicuik, which is in my constituency. We have in our primary schools wonderful eco-committees that are pioneering not only in the county, but in Scotland. We also have them in our secondary schools. Beeslack high school was the first school in Scotland to be a health-promoting school from its inception in 1984. That is, I hope, a positive context for delivery of education in the town, with the work that pupils do taking the lead.
I am not sure what a centralised register would tell us about the information that is needed, but it is clear to me that the views of communities must be heeded, as must the views of the pupils. Those views must be our interest, and are of paramount importance. I know that the minister will take that seriously.
I thank Christine Grahame for bringing this important subject to Parliament.
I hope that we all want to protect our open spaces, especially our playing fields, and I am sure that no member here is not concerned about the trend in our lifetimes seemingly to concrete over every green space, particularly in urban areas. We know that that can be to the detriment of our health and can lead to a loss of play areas for children and young people as well as older people, and that it can bring increased incidence of flooding, which is blighting so many of our homes.
Our growing awareness of the importance of open space has in recent years led to big changes and big improvements in our planning laws. The latest figures from sportscotland seem to suggest that we are making progress: its annual monitoring report states that the problem of net pitch loss peaked in the late 1990s, but since then there has been steady improvement. In fact, we have gone from large net deficits to small gains, particularly in 2004-05 and 2006-07. That is encouraging; however, the battle is clearly not over.
The decisions on playing fields are not always about protecting every unused or underused surface. For instance, we have been particularly good over the past decade at replacing old blaes pitches with Astroturf or some other artificial all-weather surface. For me, as for others, it is important that robust national criteria are applied democratically by locally elected representatives who can bring local knowledge of each site to each decision. As part of the decision-making process, it is essential that the voices and concerns of local communities are heard. As I understand it—although I do not want to comment in detail on the application—the case under discussion has not yet gone to the planning committee. If that is the case, it strikes me that Christine Grahame may be jumping the gun somewhat.
It is my understanding, based on local information, that the matter was to go to a planning committee meeting, but that has been deferred, given the objections that have been received. The position has changed.
That appears to be local democracy in action.
I hope so.
All members use members' business debates as an opportunity to raise issues of concern—in this case, issues of concern to the constituency that Christine Grahame would like to represent Even allowing for the fact that the motion is clearly written for a local audience, I had to laugh at how much at odds the wording of the motion is with Ms Grahame's Government's policy and with her support in the chamber for that policy. The motion suggests that central collection of data on playing fields will provide an extra layer of protection. I am not against that—far from it—but I ask the member to explain how exactly this new centralist approach sits alongside the historic concordat. Every day in the chamber we have to listen to monotonous repetition of the supposed benefits of the concordat. Now, we have a call for central Government action to protect residents from supposedly dreadful councils.
Ken Macintosh has—in gentlemanly fashion, I trust—invited me to intervene. One of the big issues, which overlaps with the Health and Sport Committee's inquiry, is lack of information. We have data from sportscotland, but the information by no means covers everything. We need the data if we are to protect what we have.
I will come on to that because I believe that there is a further contrast between the work that the previous Labour-Liberal Democrat Administration did to begin the reform of national policy guideline 11, with the aim of making it more binding and robust for local authorities, and the SNP Government's introduction of SPP 11 with rather watered-down criteria. If SPP 11 has not been watered down and is robust enough, why does Christine Grahame believe that it offers insufficient protection to the communities that she would protect?
I want to highlight—I am sorry for taking advantage of the motion, but my attention has been drawn to this—a particular section of the SNP manifesto, which states:
"We will introduce a moratorium on loss or reduction of school playing fields".
The same section mentions two hours of physical education a week and free swimming pool access. We know that the two hours of PE has been reduced to two hours of walking to school, and that the only free swimming pools are in Labour-controlled authorities; it is now clear that there has also been a failure to deliver the policy on playing fields. If the promise of
a moratorium on loss or reduction of school playing fields"
had been delivered, there would be no need for today's debate.
The member should wind up now.
I hope that we can all agree on the importance of open spaces, and I have no reason to believe that the local authority in question will not listen to the views of the community in reaching a decision.
I congratulate Christine Grahame on securing today's debate.
I recognise the good work that Fields in Trust Scotland does to highlight the threat to our school playing fields, and I pay tribute to all those who are involved in that organisation. Given that, as Christine Grahame notes in her motion, no central data on most aspects of school playing fields is collated by the Scottish Government, FIT Scotland's work is particularly important. The Scottish Conservatives recognise the vital and valuable role that school playing fields make in providing our children with places to take part in physical activity, including competitive sport, through PE when they are at school, and through extracurricular activities outwith school time.
More than that, school playing fields are often genuine community facilities that are used by people of all ages and can provide pleasant green spaces in urban areas. As Julia Bracewell, the chair of sportscotland, said:
"Playing fields are an important part of the school estate. They are an essential resource for many of our most popular sports and can help children adopt a more active lifestyle, and through their extended use for extra-curricular activity and for community use, they play a role in sustaining such a lifestyle beyond the schools curriculum."
The school in my local village in Argyll, Dalmally primary, has no playing field, but for many years it has managed wonderfully well—thanks to its staff—with a tarmac playground and a small area of grass around it. It cannot use the local Dalmally shinty pitch, which is next to the livestock market, because of worries about animal manure on the field. The teachers and pupils of the school are therefore hugely excited by the progress that has been made by the Dalmally Community Company, which has secured funding for stage 1 of the community hall project. I congratulate the company officials, Kenny Black and John Burke, for the staggering amount of work that they have done and the enormous amount of money that they have raised to achieve the building of what will be a community and indoor sports centre. Phase 2, which is the playing field that is nicknamed locally the field of dreams—
Order. I hope that the member will not spend the rest of his speech talking about Dalmally primary school. He can illustrate the general issue by making reference to Dalmally, but he cannot spend the rest of his speech talking about it.
I will refrain from talking any more about Dalmally, although it is relevant to my speech.
I hope that the field of dreams will become a reality for that village.
Having spoken about the progress in Dalmally, I must say that I share the concerns of communities throughout Scotland that have faced, or which currently face, the loss of school playing fields. It is a real concern that playing fields are still being lost despite SPP 11, which makes clear the exceptional circumstances that must exist before a school playing field can be sold off for development. Those sales are taking place, despite the fact that local communities such as Cuiken in Penicuik are united in their opposition to local authority plans to sell off their playing fields.
Given the focus of the Government—and members of all parties—on encouraging our young people to live more active lives, and on tackling the increasing problem of child obesity, Christine Grahame's suggestion that sportscotland should become a additional mandatory consultee has great merit and should be explored. Sportscotland has already done great work in that area, through the helpful document that it published in early 2007, "School Playing Fields: Planning and Design Guidance", which recognises that there is little up-to-date design advice on school playing fields. I hope that the minister will address that issue when she sums up in tonight's debate. Her party raised hopes in its 2007 manifesto when it promised
"a moratorium on the loss … of school playing fields",
and communities throughout Scotland will expect ministers to deliver on that.
I congratulate my South of Scotland colleague Christine Grahame on securing the debate. She has been a vocal campaigner against the proposals to build on the playing fields of Cuiken primary school and I will lend her my support in any way I can.
The motion states:
"there should be centralised data on the current provision of school playing fields, including location and acreage … sportscotland would add benefit as a mandatory consultee in any development plans that impinge on school playing fields and public open spaces."
That part of Christine Grahame's motion highlights the fact that building on, and a lack of, playing fields is not just a problem in Penicuik or the south of Scotland; we must be mindful of the fact that the issue affects the whole country. That is why the work of Fields in Trust is so important.
Why should we be so vigilant about protecting playing fields in Scotland? As has been stated, Scotland has horrific obesity levels among children and young people, yet, incredibly, as the waistline of the country continues to expand, the acreage of our playing fields seems to contract. I do not think that the irony of that will be lost on anyone in the chamber tonight. We must do all that we can to protect playing fields so that Scotland's children and young people have somewhere to play and the freedom to run around, to play a game of fitba, or simply to enjoy being outside. They need the freedom to get muddy and scrape or graze the odd knee from time to time. If they do not, we will have a generation of people who are very risk averse.
My next suggestion is perhaps a little left field, for want of a better expression. If schools had more space, they might be able to cultivate gardens in which they could grow their own food. As a by-product, they could encourage children to eat what they have produced, to eat more healthily, to learn about the seasonality of food, and to improve their palate and their health—but that will not happen if playing fields continue to be sold off to raise a quick buck.
As well as expressing concern about the loss of playing fields due to planning decisions, we must be mindful of the quality of the playing fields that we seek to protect. FIT said recently that three out of four pitches are not fit for purpose due to poor drainage, inadequate changing facilities and poor maintenance. If that is the case, the situation is terrible. I believe that FIT is trying to secure lottery funding to rectify the situation—if the money has not already been spent on the London Olympics.
The member raises an important point. What would be her preference if she had to choose between a flat, properly designed and maintained play area for football and so on and a badly drained play area on a hill that was not appropriate for such sports but which had a larger footprint? That question is relevant to the case that we are discussing.
My preference is that kids have space to play in and have adequate pitches that are properly protected and maintained. It is not a case of either/or. We have to ensure that playing fields are properly maintained. Otherwise, folk will not play on them.
A wee while back, before the election and before he became a minister, Kenny MacAskill conducted some research to compare the number of third-generation Astroturf pitches in some Scottish cities with the number in cities in small, independent, Norway. It is no surprise that the information that he got showed that there are more pitches in Norway and that, as a result, Norway benefits from having more teams of youngsters, men and women playing on them. It is amazing what that small country can do. Its work in the area is certainly something that we would like to replicate.
Constituents in my area—Carluke—have expressed concern about the provision of multi-use areas that are made of tarmac that is painted green, rather than Astroturf.
I support my colleague's efforts to save the playing fields of Cuiken primary school and nationwide efforts to improve and protect playing pitches and to encourage more sport so that, one day, we will become a healthier nation.
I welcome this evening's debate, which gives me an opportunity to emphasise the Government's commitment to prevent the loss or reduction of school playing fields and facilities where no equivalent or improved facilities are provided, and our commitment to protect green spaces for sport and informal activity, particularly in disadvantaged communities.
Although I am of course aware of the proposals for Cuiken primary school—indeed, Christine Grahame has already raised this issue in the Parliament—I understand that Midlothian Council is currently considering a planning application for the site in question. As Jeremy Purvis helpfully highlighted, given the council's interest in the land, the application might require to be notified to the Scottish ministers, so it would be inappropriate for me to comment further on this particular proposal. However, I am sure that local MSPs will use their good offices with Midlothian Council on behalf of their constituents. I should also say that I am looking forward to appearing with other ministers before the Health and Sport Committee to give evidence on health and physical activity.
Sportscotland, which is already a statutory consultee on developments that are proposed for playing fields, generally resists such proposals unless the playing fields in question are surplus to requirements or adequate replacement facilities are to be provided. As members have pointed out, Scottish planning policy 11, on open space and physical activity, which was issued by this Government in November 2007, extends sportscotland's role as consultee to a greater range of facilities.
SPP 11 also introduced a requirement for each local authority to prepare an open space audit and strategy for its area to help safeguard existing open spaces and to identify priorities for future development. By involving sportscotland more closely and requiring the preparation of open space strategies, SPP 11 delivers better, not more watered down, planning for playing fields.
Local authorities should aim to protect and enhance open spaces in their ownership; indeed, SPP 11 applies to school playing fields and to all other publicly owned open spaces. If an open space strategy demonstrates that a playing field is required to meet a continuing need, whether for school or community use, it should be protected in the development plan. Such an approach should ensure that redevelopment does not take place unless open space is shown to be surplus to requirements or replacement facilities are to be provided.
Although there is no set list of statutory consultees for development plans, changes that we are making to the planning system mean that planning authorities must prepare participation statements that set out when, how and with whom consultation on their plans will take place. Ministers expect authorities to use participation statements carefully to consider the groups and organisations that need to be involved in their particular plan and the best way to engage with them.
Each council's open space audit will provide a valuable source of local information on playing fields and their use. We see no merit in establishing a national database; it is much more important that such information is maintained locally, to inform the local decision-making process, and is accessible to local individuals and community groups.
However, sportscotland produces an annual monitoring report on planning applications that affect playing fields. It is encouraging to note that, over the past four years, the number of planning applications that affect playing fields has consistently fallen—from 118 in 2005 to 50 in 2008. As Ken Macintosh most helpfully highlighted, the most recent report shows that, since 1996, there has across the whole of Scotland been a net loss of 126 pitches, mostly the mineral ones on which we used to scrape our knees and which are now considered unsuitable for modern use.
Although, since 1996, 267 mineral and 55 grass pitches have been lost, 196 modern synthetic grass pitches have been installed. That type of pitch gives a clean and attractive playing surface that is ideal for both school and community use, because it can be used all year round in all weather conditions, which is very important in Scotland. To put that figure in context, I point out that the total number of pitches in Scotland is estimated at 5,900. As Ken Macintosh made clear, the reduction has therefore been very small—and investment in the upgrading of existing pitches and in the provision of new pitches is improving the quality of sports facilities and increasing their playing capacity, particularly in schools.
We are working with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and local authorities on the development of a new school estate strategy, which will be published in the spring. I am confident that that strategy will reflect the commitment of the Government and authorities to creating a school estate that supports the needs of the whole community. As Jamie McGrigor said, it is important that communities take ownership—in its widest sense—of the open spaces in their communities.
Meeting closed at 17:35.