I thank the deputy convener and the committee for allowing me time to speak to PE1748. I also thank my colleagues in the Equalities and Human Rights Committee, which I have just come from. With members’ indulgence, I will return to it after consideration of the petition.
I also record my thanks to Isobel Kelly of Gartcosh Tenants and Residents Association, Liz Ward and others for lodging the petition. As Mrs Kelly has pointed out, she has had several discussions with me as planning applications for sites in Gartcosh have progressed. She has also had discussions with local councillor Greg Lennon, who I am sure the committee would wish me to mention for his hard work in highlighting the issue.
I am sure that no one here will argue against the need for house building. We have a growing population, and 500,000 new homes will be built in Scotland over the next 10 to 15 years. The Scottish Government has made impressive progress on that.
Very few people would deny the desirability of the more rural locations within the central belt—where my constituency is—to developers and to people who are seeking to purchase new homes. A few months ago, I lodged a motion celebrating the results of a study that found that Glenboig is the fifth-healthiest place to live in the UK, which perhaps illustrates that desirability.
I am certain that the advantages of village living that are attractive to the existing communities are similarly attractive to people who are seeking to become part of those expanding communities. However, as the petition states, that expansion could, in time, eliminate the advantages almost entirely, through decimation of green space, loss of the sense of community, infrastructure being unable to cope with the rates of expansion, and the inevitable coalescence of distinct village communities with the mass commuter belt. Those are the issues that the petition is trying to bring to the fore.
At this point it might, for members’ benefit, be appropriate for me to describe the geographical make-up of my constituency of Coatbridge and Chryston. The larger part of my constituency—perhaps two-thirds—is Coatbridge, which is a typical large post-industrial Lanarkshire town that is very much in need of new housing and development on some of its brownfield sites. The remaining third of my constituency comprises a number of small towns and villages to the north of Coatbridge: Stepps, Muirhead, Chryston, Moodiesburn, Glenboig and, of course, Gartcosh, which we are discussing today. They are collectively referred to as the northern corridor and are encompassed by the “Chryston” part of the constituency name.
Throughout the northern corridor, every one of those unique small post-industrial former coal mining communities have witnessed extensive development. I have heard in the past week about two more large-scale proposals for Gartcosh and Stepps. Developments have led to loss of assets in green space, woodland and the wider natural environment. They have also led to transport difficulties and rapidly increasing populations that have taken schools alarmingly over capacity and left health services struggling to cope. The petitioners and others know that I have taken up those issues with some degree of success; for example, a new health centre has been designed for the northern corridor, which is long overdue.
Such scenarios are not unique to Gartcosh or to my constituency. I know that they are replicated throughout the northern corridor. I have had many discussions with community groups and individual constituents about the issues that are raised in the petition.
I recently met representatives of the “Save Stepps green belt” campaign—which is similar to the campaign of the Gartcosh Tenants and Residents Association—who have campaigned vigorously, and continue to do so, against development on the green belt, and are fighting to protect the village community. It is also worth our while to pay particular tribute to Frank and Alice Morton, Ken Maxwell and others who have campaigned so hard. After my previous meeting with them, I am pulling together, for the group, a round-table event to discuss the issue. I hope that today’s consideration of the petition can form part of the Government’s eventual thinking on the issue.
Nobody is arguing against development. I would be one of the last people to do so—I have already mentioned the need for development in the large urban part of my constituency. However, there is a feeling that development has, with little to no consultation, been imposed on the smaller communities that are attractive to developers. I know that the Government and the Minister for Local Government, Housing and Planning—to whom I have spoken about this—are trying to address the issue through the provisions of the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019, to which the deputy convener referred. The voices of the people who live in, and who are invested in, the communities are not being heard, which is why the petition has garnered traction.
I apologise for my voice. I have the cold that is going round.
The specific issues that are raised in PE1748 were not considered during scrutiny of the Planning (Scotland) Bill, or during the planning reform process. Given that the Government is doing extensive work on the subject, it seems that it is something that should be focused on. I recommend that the committee keep the petition open and that it ask for a response from the Scottish Government, and perhaps other stakeholders, on the issues that are raised in it.
On my comment about a round-table discussion, I also ask that the Scottish Government be asked to consider facilitating that or some other sort of discussion, at which communities from across Scotland—including those in my community such as Stepps, Gartcosh and others—can find common ground and have their concerns heard. Communities and MSPs of all parties could get round the table to try to find the common ground between the desperate need for new housing and minimising of the impact on unique and small communities such as Gartcosh.
I will leave it at that, deputy convener. Thank you very much.