Chamber and committees

We have come to the end of our questions. I thank all the witnesses very much for giving evidence. It was interesting to hear some of you say that this is the first time that you have been able to get your points of view across, so we really appreciate your evidence.

Good morning, and welcome to the eighth meeting in 2021 of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee. I ask all members and witnesses to ensure that their mobile phones are on silent and that all other notifications are turned off during the meeting.

Our first agenda item is to consider whether to take agenda items 3 and 4 in private. Agenda item 3 will provide an opportunity for members to reflect on the evidence that they have heard earlier in the meeting. Under agenda item 4, the committee will consider a draft of its pre-budget correspondence to the Scottish Government. Do members agree to take agenda items 3 and 4 in private?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you. I will bring in Elena Whitham, who is also joining us virtually.

I have been asked to direct my question to one person, which is difficult. I will put the question to Artemis Pana and maybe we can sneak in one more person.

The national islands plan document says that the Government and public bodies will put in place

“adaptation plans on islands that are at greater risk from climate change”

and that those adaptation plans will link closely to

“development plans for those islands”.

It is important to ensure that development plans, which contribute to infrastructure and town planning, consider changes, such as rising sea levels and stronger storms, and increase the resilience of communities and local economies, without increasing emissions. I would appreciate hearing your thoughts on those priorities for climate adaptation plans. I am sorry; I know that there was a lot in that.

Thank you for going through your work and explaining it. I love the online results explorer. Is it possible to see the breakdown of the data on fuel poverty—is there a slide for that? That is not my main question, but I ask that because we are working on the issue in the Parliament.

Respondents to the survey felt that, in some cases, there was a lack of support for young people to remain on islands. One key reason for residents’ leaving is the lack of jobs in general or jobs within their skill set. Are we starting to get enough data on the provision of jobs in different locations—in different island groupings—and in different sectors? I am looking for a mapping exercise that allows us to see where there are well-paid jobs with secure long-term contracts. Part of what underlies that question is that I am working on the issue of Highlands and Islands Airports Limited’s wanting to centralise air traffic controllers to Inverness, taking away well-paid jobs. The sense is that taking away those jobs destabilises communities. I would love to start to understand whether we have well-paid jobs in the islands with good prospects for young people. That question is directed to Philip Raines and Ruth Wilson.

Thank you.

I will come back in on that. One concern is about labour and about getting materials to islands. Has that been considered? I also think that, in some cases, communities have land but house builders do not want to build there because they are difficult to get to.

I want to pick up on the islands infrastructure fund. When the Scottish Government announced that fund, it said that it would have

“a transformative effect on the community as a whole.”

I would like to hear your thoughts on how we can involve communities in the design and allocation of that fund to ensure that it is truly transformative. We heard earlier that community-led initiatives need to be funded, so money is obviously needed.

I want to change the subject with a question for colleagues in the James Hutton Institute about Boundaries Scotland. I am a member of another committee that has been looking at electoral boundary changes for Shetland, Orkney, the Western Isles, Argyll and Bute, Highland and North Ayrshire. I am not necessarily looking for an answer to this, but I just want to flag up that Orkney, Shetland, the Western Isles and North Ayrshire were happy with the results of Boundaries Scotland’s work. On the other hand, Highland and Argyll and Bute, which are, as Jenni Minto has pointed out, blended mainland and island authorities—I know that North Ayrshire has some islands, but Argyll and Bute and Highland have a lot of them—were the least happy with the results, and I think that it would be very worth while if you could somehow track that in the work that you are doing.

The issue is about representation of rural, far-flung areas in blended authorities, because what ended up happening was that mainland rural areas started to have less representation and islands that felt more connected to the mainland felt that they were losing something, too. Perhaps it would be good to bring some cross working into this.

Thank you. Would someone else like to speak to that?