Official Report 1214KB pdf
The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-19454, in the name of Gillian Martin, on a legislative consent motion on the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, which is United Kingdom legislation.
16:22
Today, we are seeking Parliament’s approval for a supplementary LCM on the Planning and Infrastructure Bill that relates to an amendment that the UK Government tabled recently, which inserted a clause on wind generation stations that affect seismic array systems.
In Scotland, we have the Eskdalemuir seismic array, which is a Ministry of Defence seismological monitoring station in the Dumfries and Galloway area that is maintained as part of the United Kingdom’s obligation under the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty. Wind turbines can cause seismic vibrations or noise in the ground, which can impact the functioning of the array. Since 2005, the MOD has set a limit on how much vibration or noise is allowed within what is known as the 50km consultation zone. That is to safeguard the array and to ensure that it can function properly.
However, in 2018, that noise limit was breached. Since then, the MOD has objected to every planned new wind farm within that 50km zone. The new clause in the bill will establish primary powers to enable the secretary of state to make regulations at a later date that will bring forward a new policy approach to safeguarding the functioning of the array, which will allow the potential for further onshore wind development in that area while protecting a site of national security importance.
I think that it would be helpful to provide some background to members on why we are seeking Parliament’s approval for the supplementary LCM at such short notice. On 9 October, the Scottish Parliament approved the LCM for the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, but the recent amendment to which I have referred was tabled at report stage in the House of Lords on 13 October, with the text of the amendment having been shared with the Scottish Government only on 1 October. That is why the parliamentary debate has been held with such little notice. The situation was outwith my control.
I want to address up front the fact that the amendment would enable the secretary of state to make changes to planning law in Scotland, thereby encroaching on an area of devolved legislative competence. The new clause does not give the Scottish ministers any formal role in agreeing to the secondary legislation. I have written to the UK Government ministers to express my disappointment and concern about the way in which the UK Government has pressed ahead at the pace that it has done, which has not allowed for consideration of alternative approaches to safeguarding the array that respect and protect devolved responsibilities.
I asked for a further amendment to be made to the clause during the third reading of the bill in the House of Lords to require Scottish ministers to provide consent to any secondary legislation, but that has not been implemented. I am disappointed with that outcome. As everyone knows, I want Governments to work together to achieve decarbonisation, but devolution must be respected if that is to be continued.
It has been the long-standing objective of the Scottish Government to resolve the barriers to development in the area of the array, and we have been working with the UK Government and the onshore wind industry to develop a new policy approach to the deployment of onshore wind in the area of the Eskdalemuir array. To be absolutely clear, any project that is considered under the new approach will continue to be subject to all relevant and applicable considerations under the Electricity Act 1989, national planning policy and Scottish planning legislation.
The amendment would achieve something that we have been working towards for a long time. I have considered the scope of the amendment and, although it has an impact on our planning and consenting responsibilities, it is very focused and specific, and only in respect of that small geographic area. I am therefore content that the amendment is required to unlock progress with developing the new policy approach.
The UK Government has emphasised to me its commitment to working collaboratively to finalise the regulations, which will include setting a seismic impact limit on developments and confirming the geographical scope of the policy, which is expected to remain as 50km from the array.
The UK Government has committed to entering into a memorandum of understanding on the ways of working and how Scottish ministers will be engaged in the process of developing the regulations. The Scottish and UK Governments intend to consult jointly on the new policy approach proposals as soon as possible, with the aim of publishing the consultation by the end of 2025. That consultation will seek views from a wide range of stakeholders, including communities, public bodies and the onshore wind industry, so that all voices can be heard.
In seeking the Parliament’s consent for the motion, I make it clear that the amendment does not represent a precedent for other parts of the Scottish planning system, which remain wholly devolved and within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament. I have written to the UK Government ministers to make that point clear.
On the basis of the undertakings that were provided to me by the UK Government about our future working relationship and the limited scope of the amendment, I ask that Parliament approves the motion for legislative consent in relation to the aforementioned clause in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill.
I move,
That the Parliament agrees that the relevant provisions of the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, introduced in the House of Commons on 11 March 2025, and subsequently amended, relating to a new clause on wind generation stations that may affect seismic array systems, inserted after clause 28, so far as these matters fall within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament and alter the executive competence of the Scottish Ministers, should be considered by the UK Parliament.
16:27
As convener of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, I stand with something of a sense of déjà vu to express my regret that the Parliament is once again being rushed into expressing a view on a legislative consent motion because of last-minute changes to a bill at Westminster. This is the third time this year that the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, as reporting committee on the relevant legislative consent memorandum, has found itself in this position. The previous two times related to the Great British Energy Bill.
Nothing that I say today will therefore touch on the substance of the latest motion, which is mainly about the Eskdalemuir seismic array. My contribution will be about the process and the respect that there should be for it.
The UK Government amendment that triggered the LCM was tabled on 13 October, when we were in recess. Eleven days later, the Scottish Government posted the supplementary legislative consent memorandum that is being considered today. Apparently, the Scottish Parliament must express a view on the consent this week. That rendered it in effect impossible for the committee to take evidence on the matter and come to any form of formal or collective view. Therefore, the committee has reluctantly agreed to support suspending standing orders in this case, so that we do not have to report.
It would have helped if the Scottish Government had been able to lodge the supplementary memorandum a little bit earlier—not much, but a little. However, I recognise that the root cause of this case was the late tabling of the UK Government amendment. I cannot state with certainty whether there is a trend of this happening more often, but perhaps others, such as the Minister for Parliamentary Business and Veterans, are monitoring it.
Asking Parliament to agree to something without any real opportunity to take evidence devalues the principle of legislative consent. There may be rare occasions when that is truly unavoidable, but to have it happen three times in one year to just one committee does not seem rare to me. Whenever it happens, it leaves the Scottish Parliament as a bystander and not a participant—there should always be a three-way conversation between this Parliament and the Scottish and UK Governments.
When this last happened, in April, the committee agreed that I should write to the leader of the House of Commons. I received a reply that was civil but, with respect, it did not show much willingness to make meaningful change—and now here we are again. My next letter will be to the Speaker of the House of Commons to raise this as a cross-legislative matter of ensuring meaningful adherence to the Sewel convention. I hope that the Conveners Group will also discuss the matter in due course and I appeal to the Minister for Parliamentary Business and Veterans to ensure that he and his officials continue working on an early warning system for late-triggering amendments at Westminster in order to allay, as soon as possible, the use of supplementary LCMs.
The memorandum largely states that the Scottish Government is reserving its position, so I take the opportunity to add that leaving the committee waiting for a substantive follow-up is not helpful. I had recent cause to write in the same way to the Scottish Government about a different UK bill.
Returning to the case in hand, what would be most helpful would be to have a rule or convention that late-triggering amendments should stop the legislative clock at Westminster—not for long, but just for long enough to allow the relevant committee in the Scottish Parliament to take stock, gather evidence and report to this Parliament so that we can make a meaningful decision about the process.
16:31
Since its election last year, the UK Labour Government has moved at pace to achieve clean power by 2030. Today, the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero unveiled his carbon budget and growth delivery plan, detailing a comprehensive strategy to accelerate progress in a way that will bring benefits for working people, businesses and our planet. We have seen the warm homes plan rolling out across England and Wales and we know that we need to ramp up towards stronger action on that issue in Scotland. We have seen progress on clean energy jobs and we know that co-operative and community ownership that deliver community benefits must be part of that picture in the future.
Today’s LCM should be welcomed by everyone in the chamber because it is a key part of that journey towards clean power. It is in line with the Scottish Government’s own ambitions for the area and should be agreed to allow for the rapid implementation of the legislation. I very much welcome the fact that the Scottish and UK Governments have been working closely together and with industry to get the policy progress that the amendment will facilitate.
I thank Scottish Renewables for its briefing, which highlights the work of the Eskdalemuir working group and its solution for managing the impact of wind turbines on the array. That plan, while maintaining the integrity of the array, could unlock between 3GW and 6GW of wind capacity. Scottish Renewables also notes that, because 15 per cent of the Eskdalemuir consultation zone is in England, the legislation must cover both Scotland and England.
I will comment on the cabinet secretary’s remarks about parliamentary scrutiny, which I think are absolutely crucial. As Edward Mountain, the convener of the Net Zero Energy and Transport Committee, reported, there was a useful conversation at that committee on Tuesday about the urgent need to fix the issue and to ensure that we have adequate scrutiny in the Scottish Parliament when we need to get moving on issues.
I hope that that will not distract from the fact that this LCM is part of a hugely ambitious strategy to increase renewable power in Scotland. I very much welcome the cabinet secretary’s comments about the work that has been done to deliver on our renewables ambitions and to get us where we need to be. It is clear that this is a relatively narrow but effective clause and that its significance lies in addressing the stagnation of recent years and re-igniting forward momentum to deliver opportunities, jobs and energy security. I hope that we can agree to the LCM so that we can continue taking practical steps towards change and towards a cleaner future for Scotland and for the UK as a whole.
I invite Gillian Martin to wind up. You have about three minutes, cabinet secretary.
16:34
Thank you, Presiding Officer. I hope that I will not need that long.
I thank members for their contributions. I return to the purpose of the amendment. At present, there are projects that are blocked in the planning and consenting process due to concerns relating to their impacts on the array. Through the adoption of a new policy approach to managing onshore wind development in the area, those projects can now progress through the planning system in the normal way.
I am heartened by the comments that Sarah Boyack and the convener of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee made about the importance of this Parliament’s role in scrutinising all the legislation that we have to agree on and all legislative consent motions. Those points were well made. It is important that we speak with one voice, that devolution is respected and that time is given so that we can all scrutinise the issues that come before us that require decisions.
The amendment represents the first step in the change of policy on managing onshore wind development in the Eskdalemuir area. The Scottish Government will now work collaboratively with the UK Government to finalise a consultation on policy proposals and to draft the necessary regulations to enforce Ministry of Defence policy changes. In committing to doing that work with the UK Government, I reiterate that I have written to UK Government ministers to make it clear that the amendment does not represent a precedent for other parts of the Scottish planning system, which remain wholly devolved and within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament.
The amendment is restricted in scope and it has the sole ambition of unblocking onshore wind potential in the Eskdalemuir area. I ask Parliament to agree to the legislative consent motion.
That concludes the debate on a legislative consent motion on the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, which is United Kingdom legislation.
I will suspend the meeting briefly before we move to the next item of business.
16:37 Meeting suspended.