The second group of petitions, PE422, PE430 and PE454, concern the disposal of playing fields. When the committee considered those petitions initially, we agreed to write to the Executive for its view on the implementation of current planning guidelines on the disposal of playing fields. The Executive's response detailed the current planning system, and the measures that the Executive and sportscotland have undertaken to improve the system.The committee then agreed to write to sportscotland and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities regarding their views on the adequacy of current guidance and their implementation of the guidelines that are currently being developed by the Executive. A cover note that was circulated with the petition recommended that—considering the preparation of NPPG 3 under a policy advice note to support NPPG 11, and COSLA's and sportscotland's comments on the current guidelines on protecting playing fields—the committee may decide that there is no need to take further action at this time.We could agree to conclude consideration of the petitions and write accordingly to the petitioners and we could provide them with copies of correspondence from each of the bodies with which we have corresponded. I seek members' guidance on whether they wish to accept that course of action or to pursue another.
Official Report · Committee
Petitions
Playing Fields (PE422, PE430 and PE454)
Speakers
Choose an MSP to read only their contributions- Bristow Muldoon Lab 2
- Bruce Crawford SNP 2
- Nora Radcliffe LD 1
- Robin Harper Green 1
The record
7 contributionsI understand why we might want to do as the convener suggests, but I have two concerns about this issue. Torbrex community council highlights a paragraph in section 77 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 in England and Wales. Unfortunately, I do not know what that legislation says about how we could strengthen the position in Scotland, and there is no explanation in the papers. I do not feel that I have all the information that would allow me to come to a final conclusion as far as that is concerned. It might be that the new guidelines that are being drawn up by the Executive will cover that legislation and might prove to be adequate. I noted another issue from the covering paper that does not relate to particular planning issues. Sportscotland asked the Executive about preparing guidance on the appropriate standards for playing field provision. So far, sportscotland has been unable to secure the Executive's support for that work. I would have thought that that was a reasonable request for sportscotland to make, given that such guidance would provide a framework in which local authorities could operate in terms of planning guidelines and so on by establishing a standard. The committee must decide whether it wants to support sportscotland in that call—I would certainly like to ask the minister why it was rejected, because it would have been a reasonable course to take.To cut to the quick, I suggest two things. First, we should ask the minister why the Executive did not support sportscotland's view on standards. There might a good reason why the Executive did not support it—I do not know. Secondly, we can ask for further explanation of what section 77 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 in England and Wales says and compare it with the Executive's position in order to find the best option.
I picked up on Bruce Crawford's second point. I have read the papers and it seems to me that there is a gap between the guidance and appropriate standards. It is fine to defend the existing standards, but what constitutes reasonable provision of playing fields? Although that matter is obviously not within our remit, we have identified the gap, so should we draw it to the attention of the Education, Culture and Sport Committee and ask it to pick up that detail?
It could come under the guidelines to local authorities on planning—for their own provision, provision on a housing estate or provision by the education authority. If whoever forms the Government after the Scottish election in May decides to hold a consultation on planning, the issue could be considered as part of that. That would be a reasonable way forward for the Executive. That is why I think that the issue falls within our remit.
I agree thoroughly with what Bruce Crawford has just said. Despite the assurances that we receive from the Executive, we continue to lose play space and sports space.I am not satisfied by paragraph 13 of the cover note, which states:"The Executive response states that ... Sportscotland often negotiates alternative sports pitches with developers".Often those sports pitches are a long way from areas that were local and accessible to the people who used them. We do not want young children to have to travel ever further to reach play spaces that should be local and accessible. We should do everything that we can to keep the issue alive. We should be aware of the fact that this is a cross-committee issue that also involves the Health and Community Care Committee and the Education, Culture and Sport Committee.
I understand that section 77 of the Schools Standards and Framework Act 1988 was addressed in previous correspondence on the petitions. That correspondence has not been distributed with the papers for today's meeting. I suggest that we dig it out and provide members with copies of it, so that we can consider whether we are satisfied with its content. We can keep the petitions live in that respect, but we do not need to write further letters on section 77 at this stage. If members are still not satisfied after they have considered the correspondence, we can consider taking other action.In its response, COSLA indicates that it has consulted section 77 of the Schools Standards and Framework Act 1988 and believes that the current legislation is sufficient.Bruce Crawford asked about sportscotland and the issues that it has raised with the Executive. There seems to be consensus among members that we should ask the Executive how it intends to respond to sportscotland and whether it intends to issue guidelines on appropriate standards for playing field provision. Do we agree to write to the Executive on that issue, which sportscotland raised and which Bruce Crawford has highlighted? Do we agree to consider the petition further once we have received a response to that question and once the correspondence concerning section 77 has been circulated to members?
Members indicated agreement.
In this meeting
Everything on 8 Jan 2003 →- Scottish Parliament Transport and the Environment Committee Wednesday 8 January 2003 (Morning) Committee business · 2
- Item in Private Procedure · 2
- Building (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2 Bill debate · 101
- Subordinate Legislation Subordinate legislation · 7
- Subordinate Legislation Subordinate legislation · 2
- Subordinate Legislation Subordinate legislation · 5
- Petitions Petitions · 1
- Petitions Petitions · 7
- Petitions Petitions · 7
- Petitions Petitions · 14
- Petitions Petitions · 16
- Petitions Petitions · 13
- Rail Inquiry Committee business · 4
The type of each item (debate, statement, questions, members’ business and so on) and the times shown are worked out by this site from headings, the chair’s opening words and the Official Report’s running timestamps. They are not the Parliament’s own classification. Text: the Scottish Parliament Official Report.