Alex Cole-Hamilton
Scottish Liberal Democrats · Scotland
“I am sure that all members will join me in expressing solidarity with Scotland’s Muslim community after the brutal and unprovoked attacks on the streets of Edinburgh last weekend. That community’s response to those attacks has not been one of violence or revenge; it has been to make a plea for tolerance and understanding.”
“All told, more than 1,400 inmates have been let out of prison since the early release scheme began, and that is because our prisons are bursting at the seams. However, that is not a strategy and it will not protect the public.”
“Let that sink in, because the language of displacement and othering is the antithesis of the cohesion that Lord Offord speaks about so regularly. Liberals believe in reform—of course we do. The Whig Government in 1832— Amanda Bland: Will the member take an intervention? Alex Cole-Hamilton: I will give way to Amanda Bland.”
“This was an opportunity for Reform to prove everybody wrong and to pepper the chamber this afternoon with speeches that were measured in tone and full of bright ideas to fix the things that are wrong in Scotland. We have heard none of that today.”
“I welcome the minister’s remarks about the Edinburgh attacks. Does he recognise, as do members on these benches, that as well as expressing solidarity with the Muslim community of Scotland, we owe them a debt of gratitude that there was no call for activism and action on the streets of Scotland by the Muslim community?”
“That is why the Government is prioritising an economy with a strength that is felt by people, businesses and communities across Scotland. Scotland is a great place and, collectively, we are making it even greater.”
The complete record
Every one of 814 lines we hold for Alex Cole-Hamilton, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 17.
“17:29 Mark Ruskell: I thank members for their contributions, and I thank COSLA and, in particular, those in its political leadership, who have been absolutely relentless over the past four years in driving towards the line and trying to get the bill back over the line. It has been great to work with them. I also thank Roz Thomson from the non- Government bills unit, who has kept the bill on life support over the past five years. Before returning to Holyrood in 2016, I spent five years as a councillor in Stirling, and it really left a mark on me, with the importance of strong, accountable, empowered local government. It is absolutely critical; it is the level of government that works closest to the people. Comments have been made about the Verity house agreement.”
“Another referral to the Supreme Court would help no one, least of all local government, which has already waited long enough for the bill to progress. What is important is that the bill still marks a significant step forward. It embeds the principles of the European charter into Scots law and strengthens the culture of respect, partnership and mutual trust between national and local government. Agreements such as the Verity house agreement already point us in that direction but, as we have seen over the past few years, the Government can run roughshod over those principles. The motion is not about reopening old arguments; it is about finishing the job properly within our powers and sending a clear signal that the Parliament believes in strong and empowered local government. For those reasons, we will, of course, support the motion.”
“They are focused and proportionate, and they closely follow the approach that the Parliament took in its reconsideration of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill. Although it is regrettable that, by necessity, the amendments will narrow the scope of the legislation somewhat, it is still a big improvement on not having the legislation enacted at all and, clearly, we cannot proceed with another bill that might not be competent. I acknowledge the decision to amend section 2. I understand the reluctance to narrow its scope and I share the frustration that that creates, particularly among our council colleagues, but it is right to be honest about the risk of further legal challenge.”
“I therefore welcome the motion, and the signal from the cabinet secretary of the Government’s support. As we have heard, the Parliament passed the bill back in 2021, and it had strong cross-party backing. Since then, we have had the Supreme Court judgment, which was clear that certain provisions, particularly sections 4 and 5, went beyond the limits of the Parliament’s power in how they interacted with United Kingdom legislation. The reconsideration stage gives us a chance to finally respond to that judgment responsibly, but without losing sight of what the bill is trying to achieve. The proposed amendments to the bill do just that.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak on behalf of the Liberal Democrats in support of the motion. I was one of the original signatories to Andy Wightman’s bill in the previous session of the Parliament. At its heart, the bill is about a simple idea: that the power to make decisions that affect communities should always sit as close as humanly possible to the people whom those decisions serve. Too often, under successive SNP Administrations, power in Scotland has gone the other way. It has become too centralised, and local government has been treated less like a democratic partner and more like a delivery arm for the Scottish Government. We have heard a lot about the Verity house agreement, but it has had a coach and horses driven through it several times.”
“Neil Gray: HIS set out clearly that there is significant progress being made, in the management of the water and ventilation systems, as to the current safety of the hospital, which should give confidence to others. I wished for that assurance in March last year, which is why I sent Healthcare Improvement Scotland in to carry out that work. I recognise that there is now additional assurance required, ahead of the conclusion of the public inquiry, and that is why the independent oversight group has been established.”
“We have heard Anas Sarwar, Brian Whittle and Carol Mochan all ask the same question about the validation of the safety of the wards and the hospital water supply. It is a yes-or-no answer, yet we have all heard from the cabinet secretary the same circuitous, rambling answer, leaning into the outcome of a public inquiry that might not report for months. I will therefore ask the question in a different way. The cabinet secretary told Parliament that he instructed Healthcare Improvement Scotland to validate those wards last year. What did it tell him? Neil Gray: As I set out in my statement, Healthcare Improvement Scotland responded that there has been significant progress made— Alex Cole-Hamilton: Are they safe? Neil Gray: Yes, they are safe—they are safe. The Presiding Officer: Let us not be shouting at one another.”
“For the Scottish Liberal Democrats, the central test of any legislation in this area—and this speaks to Fergus Ewing’s intervention—is whether it demonstrably reduces harm, improves safety and enables access to support. On the basis of the available empirical evidence, we do not believe that the bill meets that test. This is a complex policy area, and it is appropriate that Parliament debates it and considers a range of perspectives as a bill like this progresses. We will engage with the process in good faith if the bill passes tonight. However, for the reasons that I have set out, the Scottish Liberal Democrats cannot support the bill as it is. The Deputy Presiding Officer: We now move to the open debate, and I call Jamie Hepburn to be followed by Sharon Dowey. You have up to six minutes, Mr Hepburn. 16:45”
“Decriminalisation has also been associated with a clearer distinction between consensual sex work and exploitation. It frees up police time to focus on harm, and it allows enforcement efforts to focus more directly on coercion, trafficking and abuse. We recognise the inclusion in the bill of a duty on ministers to provide support. However, we are not persuaded that introducing a new criminal offence alongside that duty would represent the most effective or coherent policy framework. In our view, support services are more effective when they are delivered independently of criminalisation and when individuals can engage with services without fear of wider legal consequences.”
“Evidence from countries that have taken the approach of criminalisation indicates that it can result in increased marginalisation, as I said. The evidence also suggests that, when buyers are criminalised, sex workers might have less opportunity to assess risk, might be pushed towards more isolated locations and might be less likely to report concerns to the police. Those factors are relevant when assessing whether the approach that is proposed in the bill will deliver its stated objectives. In contrast, in places where sex work has been decriminalised, the evidence points to improved engagement between sex workers and public authorities, increased reporting of violence and abuse, greater access to health and support services and improved working conditions.”
“People can say, “I think this might be more safe,” but that is not supported by the evidence. We analysed the evidence from the other side of the debate that was submitted to the committee—because the committee was unwilling to do so—and that evidence shows that the Nordic model is the only model that reduces harm. Alex Cole-Hamilton: I recognise the work that the member in charge of the bill has done, but we have also done work in preparation for today’s debate, and the experience of jurisdictions such as Australia suggests that what the member has said is not the case. We cannot wish away prostitution. Given that it will forever exist, we must ensure that it happens in the safest possible way. That is why my party embraces the idea of decriminalisation and the evidence from jurisdictions that have gone before us.”
“We believe in decriminalising sex work in line with international best practice. We do not support the adoption of the model that is proposed in the bill. Our position is informed by the available evidence and by the experience of other jurisdictions. Although the intention is that the bill will reduce harm, the criminalising of the purchase of sex has not consistently achieved that outcome in practice. Evidence from countries that have taken that approach indicates that it can result in increased marginalisation of sex workers, reduced visibility of activity and additional barriers to accessing support services. Ash Regan: The problem that we are wrestling with is that it is our job as legislators to engage with the data and the evidence. It is fine for people to have opinions.”
“I state at the outset that my party whole-heartedly agrees that access to appropriate support services is vital and that no one should be prevented from seeking help because of stigma and fear. Fergus Ewing: If that is the case and if section 6, which is on the right to support, is supported by the Liberal Democrats—this is not my view, but a possible outcome is that part of the bill being the only part left—surely, logically, the Lib Dems should support the bill in order to allow that right to support to be passed by the Parliament and to do something good for the most abused women in the land. Alex Cole-Hamilton: There are aspects of the bill that we absolutely support, but I will come on to the reasons why we cannot support it in its entirety. Our position on the issue has been established for some time.”
“Before I begin my remarks, I pay tribute to the member in charge of the bill. Although my party’s position, which is a long-established policy, is at odds with hers, I recognise her tenacity, passion and commitment in relation to her work on the bill. The bill proposes a number of changes to the current legal framework relating to sex work. In particular, it would introduce a new criminal offence, repeal the existing offence of soliciting for the purposes of prostitution in a public place, overturn convictions under that offence and place a statutory duty on ministers to provide support to people who currently work or have previously worked in prostitution. That support could include accommodation, financial and material assistance, counselling services and healthcare provision.”
“Rosie, in full costume—this is the first time they met—answered the door, exclaiming, “I’m Titania, Queen of the Fairies. Who on earth are you?” He replied, “I’m Birnam Wood, come to Dunsinane.” Rosie, Helen, Clare and Neil, thank you for helping Jim to become the giant that he was and for sharing him with us. We have so much love for you, and we will continue to hold you in the light that shines. Jim Wallace acted justly, he loved mercy and he walked humbly with God. We are all the poorer now that he is gone, but this Parliament and this country are immeasurably richer because he lived. 14:23”
“That is why I had no hesitation in appointing him as chair of our Scottish general election campaign in 2024. I am heartily glad that he lived to see the revival of our party, which he played such a role in, and the best election result for Liberals in his lifetime. Although Jim was a mainstay of support to us, he could not have achieved anything without the bedrock of support that he received from his family, particular from his wife, Rosie. I love the story of how they met. It was the summer of 1979, and Jim had almost forgotten about the Shakespeare-themed fancy-dress party that he had been invited to in the neighbouring flat. It was after midnight when he finally remembered, so he shoved a couple of lilac bush branches down the back of his jumper and knocked on the door.”
“However, at the moment of the balloons’ release, the cameras of the nation’s media were not trained on the cascade of golden balloons ascending into the stratosphere; they were focused on the Deputy First Minister of Scotland, who had become hopelessly entangled in the fishing net that we had used to collect them. Indeed, our press officer Neil Mackinnon literally had to rip a button from his suit jacket to set him free. However, we did not need Jim for his co- ordination or for his technical know-how; we needed him for his grasp of political strategy, for his stoicism and for his ability to discern the true north of our Liberal values. Nicol, Tavish, Willie and I, as his successors in leadership, have all turned to Jim for counsel and support.”
“There is such rancour in our politics today, so we could all learn something about his approach and lean into his legacy of doing politics through grace and reconciliation. Although Jim was a man of towering intellect, he was largely bereft of technical know-how or any sort of co-ordination. Indeed, Rosie, his wife, described him as being completely haunless. One afternoon, she discovered him astride the ride-on lawnmower, having gone up and down their garden for hours, not realising that the filter was blocked and he had not clipped a single blade of grass. We kicked off the first day of our election campaign in 2003 with a balloon launch.”
“He was central to the Constitutional Convention that made the case for devolution and, with the referendum won, he became an architect of our reconvened Parliament and of modern Scotland. He was a details man. He took great pride in—for want of a better word—the geekery of the Parliament’s formation and in helping to draft the conventions and standing orders that we still observe today. He loved this chamber. He was so proud of his involvement in its establishment and what it would go on to achieve. So much of that was made possible by his ability to work across party lines and, in particular, by his friendship with the late Donald Dewar. Jim is celebrated for his ability to lay aside political tribalism and to reach for the better nature of his adversaries.”
“The values in those words speak to so much about his politics and his dedication to public service. It was in Elphinstone hall at the University of Aberdeen, during the referendum campaign of 1997 to establish this Parliament, that I first heard Jim Wallace speak. I was just a student at the time, but that night he inspired me to recognise that I was a Liberal, that I absolutely agreed that there should be a Scottish Parliament and that I wanted to have the opportunity to serve in it one day. This weekend, the rightly offered torrent of praise for Jim focused on his many achievements in the high offices that he held, but it is often forgotten just how much of this place we owe to him.”
“Presiding Officer, I start by thanking you and the First Minister for such heartfelt words. Jim’s family and my party have been overwhelmed by the kindness that has been shown to us in these difficult days. We are heart-sore at his loss, but the outpouring of love and respect that has come forth from all sides of the chamber has been such a balm at this difficult time. A verse from the book of Micah reads: “What does the Lord require of you but to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” That verse was read to Church of Scotland congregations across the country on Sunday. It is just a part of the normal rhythms of the kirk at this time of year, yet those words speak to the qualities and life choices of Jim Wallace perhaps more than any other passage in scripture. Jim was a man of profound Christian faith.”
“The First Minister: I am aware that discussions about the budget process are still going on with the Liberal Democrats and other parties. The budget has not yet come to Parliament for stage 1 consideration, but I welcome the support of other parties for it. It has always been a priority of mine to attract the support of other parties for the Government’s budget proposals, and we did that successfully last year. Mr Cole-Hamilton has given a long list of the many reasons to vote for the Scottish Government’s budget, and I confirm that those discussions are still under way. More Homes Scotland (Affordable Homes) 4.”
“The measures that I have taken on access to workers from other countries will help in that respect. Alex Cole-Hamilton: The First Minister knows that we are prepared to vote for his budget if the measures in it are right. We are here to get things done. The Scottish Liberal Democrats have already secured some big wins through our negotiations on the budget—money for backing young entrepreneurs, for colleges, for the removal of peak ferry fares from the northern isles and for faster assessments for autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. However, that is not yet enough to win our support. We will squeeze every penny that we can out of the budget process for business rates, for hospices and, for the sake of people such as Margaret MacGill, for social care. Is his Government prepared to go further to win our support?”
“We are investing £2 billion in social care integration, and that investment has increased over the lifetime of the Government. The Government’s budget includes substantial increases in the resources that are available to local authorities and health boards as part of the measures that are required to deliver effective social care support. The matter relating to Mrs MacGill, which Mr Cole-Hamilton has raised with me previously, rests on the availability of personnel to deliver that care. As I set out to Mr Cole-Hamilton the last time that we had exchanges on the matter, the issue is significantly affected by the availability of people of working age in areas such as Caithness to deliver such services. We work closely with the local authority and NHS Highland to do all that we can to support the availability of care staff.”
“I told the First Minister previously about former care worker Margaret MacGill, who has been in hospital for more than 400 nights. She has been unable to get home because the carers she needs are not available. It has now cost the national health service nearly £200,000 to keep her in hospital when she does not need or want to be there. Three weeks on, she is still in hospital in Wick. Margaret is not alone. This week, we learned that the number of people who are waiting for a care assessment or a care package has gone up by 20 per cent in the past year. Does the First Minister really think that his draft budget will fix the crisis in social care and get people such as Margaret home? The First Minister: In addressing the issues around social care, it is vital that we provide the care that people require.”
“That includes farmers who control deer, geese or other pest species in order to protect grassland for grazing cattle and sheep, to safeguard food production, to prevent environmental damage or to meet wider public policy objectives on climate change and biodiversity. Those are not shooting estates as the Greens describe them; they are working rural businesses that are often operating on very tight margins.”
“The amendment is about proportionality and ensuring that the Government’s taxation policy does not create unintended harm for farmers and land-based businesses that are acting in the public interest. The Scottish Green Party has made it clear that its position is that rural estates should not benefit from the small business bonus scheme. The Scottish Government responded to that by introducing an exclusion in the Scottish budget. The reality of what has been proposed goes much wider than what the Government is believed to have intended. Under the current framing, landowners and farmers can lose vital non-domestic rates relief simply because sporting rights exist, even when those rights are not exercised commercially or are exercised only for essential pest control.”
“Amendment 175 disagreed to. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Before we move to group 16, I will briefly suspend the meeting for five minutes to allow members of the Parliamentary Bureau to meet outside the Holyrood room in order to discuss progress on dealing with amendments. 20:41 Meeting suspended. 20:50 On resuming— The Deputy Presiding Officer: I ask colleagues to resume their places. Group 16 is on non-domestic rates relief. Amendment 176, in the name of Jamie Halcro Johnston, is grouped with amendments 190 to 194. Jamie Halcro Johnston: My amendment 176 would ensure that the Scottish Government’s proposed changes to eligibility for the small business bonus scheme did not impact those who are shooting for pest control and did not apply to sporting rights that are not exercised for commercial reasons.”
“For Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Reform) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Against Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 24, Against 82, Abstentions 0.”
“Amendment 174 disagreed to. Amendment 175 moved—[Rachael Hamilton]. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 175 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division.”
“For Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Reform) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Against Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 24, Against 80, Abstentions 0.”
“Amendment 173 disagreed to. Amendment 174 moved—[Rachael Hamilton]. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 174 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division.”
“For Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Reform) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Against Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 23, Against 82, Abstentions 0.”
“Amendment 172 disagreed to. Amendment 173 moved—[Rachael Hamilton]. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 173 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division.”
“For Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Reform) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Against Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 24, Against 83, Abstentions 0.”
“There is no recognition of the number of renewables planning applications that were rejected by local authorities because of concerns about the cumulative impact where the decision was overturned by Scottish ministers. When I look at the excuses that the Scottish ministers give, I see that their obsession with net zero is overriding the concerns of communities and the issue of cumulative impact. We need to be very careful about how areas such as the Borders, the Highlands and the north-east are being affected. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Can I just check that you are pressing amendment 172? Rachael Hamilton: I am. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 172 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division.”
“The Deputy Presiding Officer: Begin winding up, Rachael Hamilton. Rachael Hamilton: I am sorry that Christine Grahame was not invited. Two of her SNP colleagues were there, but they did not sign the unified statement. I turn to Gillian Martin’s comments. I will start on a positive note and thank her, because I am glad to hear that there will be mandated engagement— that is a step forward for the SNP. I am also pleased to hear what she said about the good practice principles and that there will be greater community consultation. I know that people who are watching this right now will be really pleased with that. I am disappointed, however, that the Government is not accepting my amendments.”
“There is no dubiety about the number of community councillors who spoke at the convention. The convention has been replicated in the north-east, the Highlands and the south of Scotland, which are the areas that have had the most planning application rejections by local authorities overturned by Scottish ministers. They are representative of the individuals and communities that are being affected by the proliferation of industrialisation, as Christine Grahame described it to the First Minister during First Minister’s question time last week. I will take Christine Grahame’s intervention. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Very briefly. Christine Grahame: I was not invited to the convention. If I had been invited and had been unable to attend—remember, I was not invited—I would certainly have sent my apologies.”
“Rachael Hamilton: I will address Alex Cole- Hamilton’s contribution, if he has not gone shopping to get avocados. I unsuccessfully lodged amendments at stage 2 to review the impact of renewables and energy infrastructure on food production and the natural environment. I also lodged an amendment on the prohibition of energy developments in sites of special scientific interest, but his Liberal Democrat colleague Beatrice Wishart voted against that. On Christine Grahame’s point, if she had showed up at the energy convention, she would have realised that— Christine Grahame: Will the member take an intervention? Rachael Hamilton: When I have finished the point. If she had done that, she would have realised that there were 40 community councillors representing 80,000 people.”
“Additionally, the prohibition on consenting any overhead lines that are above 400kV until a code is approved would create an immediate moratorium on critical transmission infrastructure, which is essential for connecting electricity generation and maintaining grid resilience, and there is no specified timeframe for resolution. I encourage members not to support amendment 188. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Be as brief as possible. Gillian Martin: Amendments 189 and 195, in the name of Douglas Lumsden, should not be agreed to, as they are also incompatible with the reserved legislation. The amendments appear to misunderstand the reserved-devolved boundary for energy consenting, so the Parliament should vote against them. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Rachael Hamilton to wind up and press or withdraw amendment 172.”
“Amendment 188 would require comparative assessment of underground or subsea alternatives as part of an individual section 37 application, fundamentally changing the nature of the consenting process in a manner that conflicts with legislation that is reserved to the UK Government. The 1989 act reserves the generation, transmission and distribution of electricity to Westminster. The Scottish Parliament cannot use devolved planning or environmental legislation to override or modify that reserved statutory framework, which would ultimately be the effect of the amendment.”
“The transmission of electricity is reserved to the UK Government under the Scotland Act 1998, and the regulation of the construction of overhead lines under section 37 of the 1989 act also relates to reserved matters. A prohibition on the grant of consent under section 37 is accordingly outwith the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament. 20:30 Section 37 is a consent regime for specific proposed overhead lines, not an options appraisal framework. Applications are for a defined line along a specified route, and Scottish ministers determine whether to consent to the specific proposal as laid out in the application; they do not explore which of several alternatives should be built, as has been suggested by Mr Lumsden.”
“Although the operation of the planning system in Scotland is devolved, the generation and transmission of electricity, as regulated by the 1989 act, relates to a reserved matter. It is unclear to me, therefore, what the amendment is trying to achieve. A more significant concern, which I urge Parliament to seriously consider, is whether amendment 174 is outwith the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament, given that it appears to be seeking to prohibit applications being made under sections 36 and 37 of the 1989 act, which is UK legislation. Amendment 188, by Douglas Lumsden, should not be accepted, as it is fundamentally at odds with the basis of the devolution settlement regarding how the section 37 electricity consenting process works.”
“That enables them to balance all considerations in the decision-making process. As part of that process, statutory consultees such as NatureScot and SEPA play an important role in providing advice on potential impacts on the natural environment. Amendment 174 seeks to put a moratorium on applications for planning permission for major energy infrastructure developments. However, it appears to relate only to developments that would be the subject of applications to the Scottish ministers for consent under the Electricity Act 1989. Those cases relate not to applications for planning permission, but to applications for consent under sections 36 and 37 of the 1989 act.”
“Those principles are advisory, but that is as far as the Scotland Act 1998 allows us to go. For those reasons, I encourage members not to support amendment 173. With regard to amendments 174 and 196, the Scottish Government is committed to balancing the need to deliver net zero with the need to protect our natural environment. It is essential that communities are able to engage with our planning and consenting systems, which is why we have recently taken steps to make it easier for communities to participate. We already have in place robust frameworks for assessing the impacts of energy infrastructure proposals on the environment. Those are designed to ensure that ministers receive the information that they need on the likely significant effects of any development, and any proposed mitigating measures.”
“In relation to community consultation, I make it clear that statutory pre-application consultation with communities is a vital and long-standing requirement of certain planning applications that are made to the relevant planning authority. That applies to developments that are classed as national or major developments. In addition, the amendment would impose obligations on planning authorities in relation to applications that they are legally unable to determine, and, because the amendment seeks to modify the operation of reserved energy consenting powers, it is in any event beyond the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament. As I said, we are already working on revising our good practice principles for energy developments now that the public consultation is closed.”
“With regard to amendment 173, when developments come forward, impacts on communities, nature and cultural heritage, including cumulative effects, are already important considerations in the decision-making process, along with the views of the local community. All applications are subject to site-specific assessments, including environmental impact assessments where required. Consultees including NatureScot, Historic Environment Scotland and SEPA play an important role in providing advice to decision makers on potential impacts of development. Where an environmental impact assessment is needed, legislation requires consideration of all likely significant effects on the environment, and those must be identified and assessed in the EIA report. Amendment 173 largely duplicates those existing requirements and is therefore not needed.”
“My officials have been engaging with community benefit groups as part of that refresh, and I am confident that good progress is being made. I have asked my officials to plan a series of targeted public engagements as part of that work so that they can hear directly from communities that are involved with community benefits from onshore renewable developments. I have also asked officials to organise an opportunity for me to engage directly with community representatives on the good practice principles. I will keep Parliament updated on those plans. For those reasons, I encourage members not to support amendments 172 and 175, in order to allow that engagement to progress.”
“That change will ensure that all communities have the opportunity for mandated meaningful engagement at an earlier stage and it will ensure that procedures are better aligned with existing provisions under our planning system. In addition, I have already tasked officials in the Scottish Government with taking forward plans to establish a forum to better hear directly from communities as the strategic plans that will shape the need for future energy infrastructure are developed. Members will also be aware of on-going work to refresh the good practice principles for community benefits from onshore renewable energy developments—I agree with Alex Cole-Hamilton that they are out of date, so I am refreshing them. They were consulted on last year and we published the results in October.”
“That is why, when an application for planning permission under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended, is made for a development that is classed as national or major, applicants are already required to undertake formalised pre- application consultation with communities. In addition, the United Kingdom Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 has recently afforded Scottish ministers new powers to make regulations to mandate that developers that are seeking consent for large-scale developments under the Electricity Act 1989 must engage with local communities and stakeholders during the pre- application stage.”