Planning, Infrastructure and Place Advisory Group minutes: June 2023

Attendees and apologies

Joint Chairs

• Fiona Simpson, Scottish Government
• Tony Rose, Scottish Futures Trust

Core group

• Richard Ballantyne, British Ports (online)
• Susan Campbell, Scottish National Investment Bank
• David Cowan, Scottish Government
• Pam Ewen, Heads of Planning Scotland
• John Hamilton, Winchburgh Developments
• Soren Jensen, Infrastructure Transparency (online)
• Martin McKay, Clyde Gateway
• Francesca Osowska, NatureScot
• Ailsa Raeburn, Community Land Scotland (online)
• Rachel Skinner, WSP (online)
• John Trower, Optiminity (online)
• Sara Thiam, Scottish Council for Development and Industry
• Hamish Trench, Scottish Land Commission
• Kat White, Scottish Government
• Jane Wood, Homes for Scotland

Support

• Emma Cairns, Scottish Government (online)
• Andy Kinnaird, Scottish Government
• Steven Mackie, Scottish Government
• Suzanne Stephen, Scottish Government
• Carrie Thomson, Scottish Government (online)
• Greg Walker, Scottish Government (online)
• Lynne Ward, Scottish Futures Trust

Apologies

• Iain Docherty, Stirling University
• Scott Mathieson, Scottish Power Energy Networks
• Pauline Smith, Development Trust Association Scotland

Items and actions

Welcome 

Fiona Simpson (FS) welcomed everyone to the first meeting and explained the meeting would be co-chaired.  The group members introduced themselves, noting their interest areas.

FS requested that the members notify the Secretariat of any Declarations of Interest after the meeting.

Action: All members to provide any relevant Declarations of Interest 

How we got here – background and purpose

Background

Tony Rose introduced this section of the meeting, noting there is a broad history that has set the basis for this group. Three introductory presentations set this out, including key planning milestones towards National Planning Framework 4; Infrastructure Commission for Scotland and the Infrastructure Investment Plan priorities; and Place Based Investment founded in the Place Principle.  

There was broad discussion of how the group could support the aims of these three priority areas.  

Purpose and objectives

There was good discussion on the draft purpose and objectives of the group, with focused suggestions on how to refine these.  This focused on issues such as ensuring the work of the group was embedded within wider policy; focused on good delivery; supports change at pace as well as exploring longer term improvement; is supported by transparent and quality data; and is clearly defined.

Action:

• secretariat to refine paper 1 incorporating as appropriate recommendations and re-circulate for next meeting
• all members to consider volunteering to support development of Monitoring & Evaluation paper, including identifying draft measures of success
• the group were asked to advise if they have any issue with the announcement of the membership of the group going out via social media later this week

Governance and structure

It was confirmed that the group are members of PIPAG in a personal capacity, not representing their organisations. The proposed hub and spoke approach was agreed to be a good governance model. 

There was discussion around the membership of the group with some noting not all of those involved in infrastructure have been included. It was acknowledged however that ensuring the group was a manageable size and facilitated activity was important. The reference group can be updated as work progresses. 

The timeframe for the group was discussed including the value of a shorter more intense model. It was agreed that there would be benefit in a multi-year approach initially, aligning with the IIP timeframes, ensuring NPF4 and Place priorities can influence the next IIP sufficiently.   

Action: the group were also asked to advise if there was anyone missing from the reference group 

Initial priorities for PIPAG

Initial priority themes were discussed.  There was a desire for activities to be driven by identified barriers to delivery, using practical project successes and challenges to support this.  A number of good practice models were discussed.  Finding a balance of shorter term priorities with medium-longer-term activities was felt to be important.  This was particularly relevant in supporting Local Development Plan development.

Action:

• all group members to provide written feedback on the papers by end of June
• group members to provide written feedback by end June on the themes presented in Paper 2 Infrastructure First to help evaluate the short, medium and longer term activities for the group 
• secretariat to add agenda item to next meeting on identifying quick wins from the Infra First paper

Next steps and round up

The format of the next meeting was discussed with a desire that more time be given to identify priorities, using practical projects and solution to guide this.

The group were thanked for their valued and passionate contribution.  

Action:

• secretariat to review whether a full development day can be set up 
• secretariat to dentify agenda including possible speakers for the next meeting