Chamber and committees

I will bring in Fulton MacGregor and then Collette Stevenson, Russell Findlay and Rona Mackay.

The next agenda item is to consider correspondence from the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Veterans on virtual trials and the current practice of charging for court transcripts. I refer members to paper 5. I thank the cabinet secretary for his letter.

First, I remind members that the committee recognises that the use of virtual trials is already provided for in the Coronavirus (Recovery and Reform) (Scotland) Act 2022. However, despite that and the practice note that was issued by the Lord Justice General, very few fully virtual trials have been held. The committee has been keen to see more take place, particularly for cases involving rape and other serious sexual offences. The question remains of how we can see more of such trials in order to build up an evidence base to inform whether they could become an option for prosecution of appropriate sexual offences cases.

Secondly, on the issue of the current practice of charging for court transcripts, I welcome the cabinet secretary’s comments, and I note his support in principle. However, in his correspondence, he refers to the possibility that further consultation might be required. Members will recall that we have written to the cabinet secretary on the issue, because we are keen that it is considered prior to the introduction of the forthcoming criminal justice reform bill to enable us to consider such a provision as part of the scrutiny of that bill, which could provide a suitable legislative opportunity to resolve the issue.

There is quite a bit in there. Do members wish to make any comments on virtual trials?

The next agenda item is consideration of an update to our action plan. This item was delayed from our previous meeting. In the spirit of saving time, rather than considering the action plan page by page today, I ask members whether they are happy to let the clerking team know if they have any queries about, or additions or amendments to, the action plan. We can come back to the action plan at a future meeting. Do members agree to that?

To follow on from those responses, I note that a key part of the decision-making process is the information that is provided to the court, on which decisions are based. The provisions in the bill put criminal justice social work front and centre of that process. In their detailed submission, Hannah Graham and Fergus McNeill articulate their views on other contributions to the bail decision-making process and elsewhere—for example, on release from custody and in the third sector.

I will come back to Lesley McAra and then bring in Hannah Graham and Fergus McNeill. Perhaps you could outline your thoughts on the proposals specifically as they apply to criminal justice social work, and your feelings on the practicalities around resourcing, for example, which we hear about time and time again.

I agree.

I agree with what members said about court transcripts. I suggest that we should clarify with the cabinet secretary whether there is a plan to undertake a consultation on the proposals in advance of the introduction of the criminal justice law reform bill, or whether his letter refers to the fact that that might be done at some future point. There is a lack of clarity about timescales, so I am keen that we get more detail about that.

Are members happy with that approach?

Members indicated agreement.

Thanks very much.

I will ask a follow-up question, but will Emma Bryson pick up that question first?

I welcome the draft NPF4, and I look forward to hearing the minister’s response to the issues that are raised in the debate.

Yes, I agree 100 per cent. I thank the member for his intervention. I totally agree with that, and I have had a lot of contact with constituents who have had that very experience. I wholly welcome anything that makes the process more accessible.

I am sorry—I have lost my place. As I said, those significant projects are all within metres of some of the lowest-standard council housing in the city. Therefore, it is no surprise that people feel developed on.

Earlier this week, the Scottish Government published its “Draft Energy Strategy and Just Transition Plan—delivering a fair and secure zero-carbon energy system for Scotland”, which outlines Scotland’s transition away from fossil fuels. In its briefing, Scottish Renewables outlines that NPF4 provides a key opportunity to deliver a net zero-driven planning system that will support Scotland in reaching its net zero target while also supporting low-carbon investment, caring for our environment and, importantly, reducing our reliance on fossil fuels.

I will pick up on the point made by the NZET Committee about the delay and churn that are associated with the fact that applications take too long, which potentially puts projects at some risk. I have raised that issue in the chamber in the past, and I will monitor it closely going forward, so I am interested in any comment that the minister has on that.

I am very pleased to speak in the debate in support of the fourth national planning framework.

I thank all the organisations that provided briefings for the debate, including First Bus, Scottish Land & Estates, Homes for Scotland, Scottish Renewables and others. For me, they were an extremely important additional source of reference. They also illustrated the breadth and reach of NFP4 in underpinning reform in our planning system so that we are positioned to play a key role in addressing the challenges of climate and nature.

The revised draft NPF4 reflects a range of changes that were made in response to the representations that were made during the consultation and the report that the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee prepared. I commend the committee’s follow-up report, which contains its response to the concerns that were raised about the original draft. I will come back to the work of the NZET Committee on NPF4 later in my speech.

I note the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee’s positive response to the significant improvements that were made in the revised draft: the new emphasis on climate and biodiversity, and the increased clarity and focus that that will offer decision makers. On the monitoring of NPF4, I am pleased to note the committee’s desire to hear from planners on their experience of applying climate change and biodiversity principles and the extent to which they have sufficient clarity and support to make their decisions.

The north-east is rightly positioning itself as a centre for energy transition. However, I believe that, to date, the debate on that issue has derived from an industry context. NPF4 now offers an important opportunity to refocus the debate on how our transition will impact our land use and development.

In my north-east constituency, planning continues to appear front and centre in constituent concerns and inquiries. For example, there is the transport infrastructure around the new south harbour that is under construction, which is featured in NPF4, and there are pollution concerns relating to an energy-from-waste plant that is under construction. Perhaps the biggest issue is the inclusion of a community green space for development in the Aberdeen City local development plan that is likely to be the subject of a future renewables planning application. Those are all significant projects, and they all are within metres of some of the lowest-standard council housing in the city.

Therefore, it is no surprise that local folk feel that, to date, there has been little evidence of a planning system that supports

“our quality of life, health and wellbeing”,

enables community benefit for everyone, and improves and strengthens

“the special character of our places”.

Those descriptors were included as suggested questions in the Scottish Government guidance for community events on NPF4 in order to stimulate thinking about how the planning system might be delivered.

Planning really matters to our communities—as others have highlighted—to our businesses, to public services and to the future wellbeing and prosperity of generations to come. I welcome the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee’s view that

“For NPF4 to succeed it is critical that communities are not only engaged in the planning process, but that their ambitions for the areas in which they live are realised. ”

I am pleased that the Criminal Justice Committee held a meeting with Police Scotland officers to discuss the issue last year. More recently, the Scottish Police Authority hosted a conference on mental health and policing. Both provided valuable insight into the challenges of policing, and of the mental health and mental wellbeing of officers and staff.

I welcome the increase in the police budget, which reflects that policing is a priority for this Government. Does the cabinet secretary agree that the higher pay for officers in Scotland shows that the Scottish Government recognises the hard work and utter commitment of our police officers?