HARRY C Smith suggests MSP Graham Simpson's New Build Homes (Buyer Protection) Bill is something to embrace ("Foundations being laid for a deal on new-build deal", Agenda, The Herald, May 13).
But standard missives are not a lot of use if they fail to address the huge "non-adoption" problem – where solicitors currently fail to check whether the roads, drains and lighting have actually been adopted by the local council. With more than 20,000 new purchasers on "non-adopted" estates this is a key test that the bill urgently needs to address.
Or will the standard missives provide long-term insurance cover for all the houses now being built on "dodgy land" – with no Environmental Impact Assessment in sight? The Scottish Government seems happy to encourage EU law to regularly be bypassed in Scotland. Bets are now being taken on when the first sink-hole" in Scotland will occur.
And it's unlikely the bill will address the other quality issues – from the extensive snagging (from pre-fabrication and extensive sub-contractors); non-community-controlled factors to manage open space (without "fleecing"?); or to address the shoebox size of new private houses (the smallest in Europe). Will the bill set out a modern Scottish standard of minimum sizes and minimum storage for all new homes (not just social and affordable as the Glasgow and Fife Standards do)? Unlikely.
Indeed it is somewhat ironic that a Scottish Government that professes to care for Scotland, is quite happy to encourage building in the Green Belt at very low densities (16 d/ha, or dwellings per hectare). There is no incentive to build on brownfield land, so it continues to lie unused. There is no requirement to build at a "designing streets" density of at least 30 d/ha, which would help protect Scotland's Greenbelt.
Will the bill better protect Scotland's green fields? Or will the Standard Clauses simply try to hide the mounting problems?
Dave Sutton,
Architect and planner, Cambuslang.
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel