I READ with interest your article on a call for an overhaul of the planning system by a group of environmental and social groups angered by the granting of permission to a number of wind farms and a handful of other decisions they have opposed ("Call for greater transparency after 'bad planning choices'" and Letters, The Herald, March 2).
Scotland's planning system has undergone major reform in recent years and I believe is held with high regard across the UK. A strong policy framework provides the context for planning decisions to be taken balancing the environmental, economic and social opportunities and potential impacts. National Planning Framework 3 and Scottish Planning Policy, as well as more local planning policies, help shape decisions.
The planning system is certainly not broken and does not need further upheaval; rather we live in a democratic country within which decisions on major planning applications are made. Does anyone truly believe the creation of a new, unelected quango is the answer?
I do not recognise the contention that "public confidence in the planning system is at an all-time low". This does not chime with the messages I hear from across Scotland through communities and developers.
The planning system has an important role and we need to continue to provide stronger leadership across both public and private sectors, including politicians, to protect and enhance our wonderful environment whilst moving to a low carbon economy. What we cannot have is a veto on planning decisions from any group, no matter how well intentioned.
Pam Ewen,
Convenor, Royal Town Planning Institute Scotland,
18 Atholl Crescent, Edinburgh.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article