Chamber and committees

I thank the witnesses for joining us this morning. Do you think that the delivery plan does enough to drive down cost of living issues? Perhaps Emma Congreve can start.

Thank you for that.

Finally, are you aware of regional divergence and differences in Scotland around opportunities or in the ability of parents to access employment? For example, do we have any data specifically on Edinburgh and the south-east, where, even through the pandemic, things have grown continuously? Emma Congreve, I do not know whether you have any data on that. It might be something that we need to look at. If you could write to us, that would be helpful.

To ask the Scottish Government what support it is providing to help young people at risk from exclusion from mainstream education. (S6O-00976)

Such situations are often complicated and complex, so we need to make sure that appropriate support is in place for vulnerable and disadvantaged children. Scottish Conservatives support the establishment of family hubs that bring together health, education and social care services. Would the cabinet secretary agree to a pilot project in Scotland to establish how that model could be developed and rolled out across the country?

I probably speak for all members of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee—and possibly for members of all the Parliament’s committees—when I say that, instead of counting sheep to get to sleep at night, I now count national planning frameworks. I am sure that it is even worse for the minister.

I pay tribute to all the individuals, organisations and businesses that have given evidence and submitted their views to the committee and to the work of all the committees that are involved in NPF4. Working on a piece of work such as this shows the Parliament at its best.

The key concerns that are outlined in the committee’s report on NPF4 very much stand, so I welcome what the minister has said today. I hope that he will take the concerns seriously and use the time that he now has to fix the framework.

I want to touch on a few important issues and bring attention to a few concerns that Conservative members have about NPF4 as it currently stands. Supporting the regeneration of our high streets is important, and supporting the Scottish retail sector to recover from the pandemic is critical. There is cross-party support for the town-centres-first approach in our planning system that previous NPFs have aimed to achieve. However, there are concerns about the proposed moratorium on out-of-town retail developments, which is too prescriptive. We should look at changing that and consider how the planning system currently looks at the merits of individual planning applications. Garden centres and agricultural machinery retailers are often on the outskirts of towns, which is something that we need to consider.

I agree with what Gillian Martin said regarding one of the key themes that is missing from the framework, which is the need to prioritise active travel and building healthier communities. The pandemic has demonstrated the importance of access for all of us to safe green spaces for exercise, sport or mental wellbeing. We need to capture that in the way that our communities develop.

During our time on the Health and Sport Committee, the minister and I heard of a number of opportunities to improve community access for sports clubs to local facilities, especially schools. A number of proposed reforms were put to committees during the previous session of Parliament. Those could make a real difference in ensuring that new housing developments have access to green space, and they would be in addition to the access legislation that we have all supported.

I welcome the points made by the Scottish Sports Association during the process. There is the potential to take a number of reforms forward. I know that the minister attended the cross-party group, and I hope that he will take those points forward.

As Dean Lockhart said, it is clear that there are and will be a number of competing priorities and pressures within NPF4. RSPB Scotland, the Woodland Trust and Friends of the Earth Scotland all say in their briefings that the current draft of NPF4 lacks the policy detail that planners—who will inevitably be taking it forward—will need to tackle the nature and climate crisis within the planning system.

The delivery of targets for renewable, clean energy is a key area of NPF4 that needs significant improvement. I have highlighted that at committee meetings. Companies in the renewables sector have made it clear that they have significant concerns about the current draft. A number of companies have said that the framework will be fatal to the renewables sector if changes are not made to the draft. It is telling that almost 20 per cent of the correspondence that the committee received during its call for views on NPF4 came from renewable energy companies, highlighting their obvious and real concerns about the framework as it currently stands.

The sector has outlined a number of options for redrafting, which I believe have been put to ministers. I hope that ministers will look at those. It is concerning that, as it stands, we could see a less positive planning framework for renewable developments than the one we saw in the 2014 Scottish planning policy.

Finlay Carson said that there has been a lot of focus, during all committee evidence sessions, on the wording of the framework. That is really important, and it will be a challenge for the civil servants who are working on the framework, as was clear from the evidence that we took in committee, but it is important that we see those changes. Key sectors have provided helpful suggestions about how outcomes can be achieved, especially in policies 3, 19, 28 and 32, and about whether the descriptive word that is used has to change from the term that was used in the three previous frameworks. It will be difficult, but I hope that the minister and his officials are looking seriously at that. If we are serious about our net zero targets and about the climate emergency, the energy transition and the huge opportunity that it provides for Scotland to deliver supply chain jobs are important. Changes in the wording of those policies could be part of that change.

Perhaps the most important issue is that of delivering the new and affordable homes that we all want to see. Homes for Scotland highlighted a number of key concerns in its submission to the consultation. As the framework currently stands, we could see a reduced number of homes being delivered, exacerbating the housing crisis. I want a housing crisis element to be included in the framework. Many communities are in housing crisis and that should have been looked at. It is important that the framework delivers the homes that we all want to see. There is a lack of detail in the delivery strategy about the financial interventions that will help to deliver the homes that Scotland wants to see. As the convener said in her opening remarks, the failure to address on-going resourcing challenges within local authorities often holds back key planning decisions in many sectors. I hope that we can address that.

I welcome the constructive approach across Parliament that the minister has taken to date. I hope that today is genuinely the start of a process whereby ministers will listen and reach out across the chamber and that we will work to make sure that the final version of NPF4 delivers the planning system that Scotland needs to deliver the homes, the energy and the communities that we all want to see.

The cabinet secretary said that she is working tirelessly, but the number of people who are homeless in the capital is increasing, and Scottish ministers are holding back £9.3 million of emergency homelessness support because of a bureaucratic anomaly. How does the cabinet secretary expect the City of Edinburgh Council to end homelessness by the end of this parliamentary session when it is being chronically underfunded by the Scottish Government?

That is irrelevant.

The cabinet secretary said that £5 million will be made available to NHS Grampian to support moving changes forward in Moray. What will that funding be used for? As has been outlined throughout this statement session, families that are being transferred to Aberdeen face significant challenges. What additional support will be provided to those families when they are in the granite city, especially with regard to accommodation?

That is very helpful. When we hear public bodies saying, “Lessons will be learned,” most of us think that they are learned only until the next scandal or the next issue. Whether your recommendations are followed up is really important. Has that follow-up work not been possible over the past two years because of Covid?

Those of us who support constituents have to manage expectations sometimes, as well.

My final question is on helping vulnerable people through, specifically, the Scottish welfare fund. I know that you have looked at a number of cases regarding people applying for various grants, including crisis grants. Can you tell me about the number of cases that have been coming to you for review?