Scottish Government

INQUIRY REPORTERS UNIT
REVIEW OF THE YEAR 2003-2004

This document is also available in pdf format (256k)

Ministerial foreword

I am very pleased to be able to present the 8 ^th annual report of the Scottish Executive Inquiry Reporters Unit for the business year 2003-2004.

The targets set for the Unit's casework performance have been tightened progressively over the years, although no such change was made last year in view of the relocation of SEIRU from Edinburgh to the Callendar Business Park in Falkirk. It is commendable not only that the relocation went ahead as planned but that all of the performance targets were met during this period. This removal was in line with the Scottish Executive's policy of, wherever appropriate, decentralising public sector jobs as part of a more accessible, open and responsive relationship with the community. It is good to have been able to welcome so many new members of staff to the Unit, as well as reinforcing the thanks to former staff that were expressed in the last report by my predecessor Margaret Curran.

The modernisation of the planning system remains a key objective, and a number of initiatives and consultations are expected to bear fruit in the coming months. I look forward to the contribution which the Unit will play in creating a modern, progressive plan-led system that increases public satisfaction and meets the objectives of Ministers and of their Partnership Agreement.

Malcolm Chisholm MSP
Minister for Communities

Introduction by the Chief Inquiry Reporter

Welcome to the Review of the Year 2003-2004 for the Scottish Executive Inquiry Reporters Unit.

The review follows the now established format of previous years, and is intended to provide statistics and an accompanying commentary on the work carried out by the Unit during the year. If you have any comments on its format or content, or any suggestions as to how we might improve it, we would welcome them.

On 8 March 2004 we moved to our new administrative headquarters on the Callendar Business Park in Falkirk. The selection of Falkirk was the culmination of an examination of alternative locations and buildings within the context set by the Executive's relocation policy. A great deal of preparation was fitted into a short time. Many staff chose to continue to work in Edinburgh in posts within other parts of the Scottish Executive. Recruitment and training was thus added to the physical preparations for the move and the fitting out of the new building. I am grateful to all our staff in Greenside Lane for their forbearance during the uncertainties of the year, and for their willing assistance in the successful integration of their successors.

In support of our home-based inquiry reporters we now have a very capable band of administrators, who are to be congratulated for the enthusiasm and dedication with which they have approached their new jobs. It is particularly commendable that in a period of upheaval all staff, old and new, made such a valuable contribution. This allowed the Unit to meet all of the Ministerial targets for timeliness in casework handling.

During the year we have further enhanced the planning appeal search facility available on our website, the address of which is shown below, by the inclusion of weekly lists of appeals received and also those decided. As before, copies of decisions by Inquiry Reporters can be retrieved, downloaded and printed. We will make further improvements as resources allow.

James McCulloch
Chief Inquiry Reporter

Scottish Executive Inquiry Reporters Unit
4 The Courtyard
Callendar Business Park
Falkirk FK1 1XR
Telephone 01324 696 400
Facsimile 01324 696 444
Email seiru@scotland.gov.uk
Web pages www.scotland.gov.uk/planning_appeals/seiru

The Scottish Executive Inquiry Reporters Unit

The Unit is part of the Scottish Executive Development Department. Its office at Callendar Business Park, Falkirk, is separate from the remainder of the Development Department, and from the rest of the Scottish Executive. The responsibilities of the Unit include:

• all planning and similar appeals lodged with the Scottish Ministers
• consideration of submissions on planning applications called-in by the Scottish Ministers for their decision
• non-planning cases, such as objections to compulsory purchase orders; objections to traffic regulation orders; harbours; fisheries; and pollution cases
• arranging for these cases to be determined by public local inquiry, hearing, or by an exchange of written submissions
• supplying reporters to planning authorities to hold a local plan inquiry to consider and report on objections to local plans

Decisions and reports

The Scottish Ministers appoint a reporter to deal with each planning case. In the vast majority of cases, the decision is delegated to the reporter, who writes a letter explaining his or her decision and the reasons for it.

However, each year, the Scottish Ministers recall a small number of planning appeal cases for their own decision. A small number of planning applications is also called-in for Ministers' decision. In these cases the reporter prepares a report setting out the issues that have to be determined, together with conclusions, and a recommendation to Ministers. The report is then considered by the Scottish Ministers who subsequently issue their decision.

Written submissions, hearings and inquiries

Over 90% of the Unit's casework is dealt with by the exchange of written submissions. Under this procedure, a structured and timetabled series of written exchanges takes place involving the appellant, the planning authority and any other persons who have indicated their interest. These are considered by the reporter, who inspects the site, generally in the presence of the parties, and then issues his or her decision or a report and recommendation.

In any appeal the appellant or the planning authority can request to be heard by a person appointed by the Scottish Ministers. In these circumstances, a formal public local inquiry or a more informal hearing is held.

The conduct of public local inquiries in planning cases is governed by statutory procedure rules. The inquiry offers the opportunity for the presentation of evidence by the appellant, the planning authority, any other parties involved in the case (such as consultees like SEPA or SNH), and by members of the public. In public local inquiries, there is the opportunity for those giving oral evidence to be cross-examined. A reporter holds the inquiry, and then writes a decision letter determining the appeal or (in non-delegated cases) writes a report to the Scottish Ministers making a recommendation.

Hearings take the form of a discussion led by the reporter, which follows an agenda circulated in advance, following the exchange of statements prepared by all of the participants. There is no opportunity for formal cross-examination. Matters that do not need to be discussed at the hearing are considered on the basis of the parties' written submissions. These procedures are set out in a Code of Practice.

Staff resources

Inquiry reporters provide the professional input to the Unit's work, the core of whom are full-time and are established civil servants. A group of fee paid consultant part-time reporters is used to accommodate peaks in the appeals caseload, and to hold local plan inquiries. Both groups of reporters work from home.

The Unit's administrative staff organises all of the casework from its offices. These staff form casework teams, with individual case administrators taking responsibility for specific planning authorities throughout Scotland.

Volume of cases 2003-2004

Table 1 shows that there were 427 cases in hand at the beginning of the business year and that a further 1,193 cases were received during the year. In 2003-2004, 967 cases were determined by reporters acting under delegated powers and 71 were the subject of reports to the Scottish Ministers. The Unit thus processed 1,038 cases to a decision in the course of the year.

Table 1: Volume of cases

* Including appeal and non-appeal cases
** Figures now include administrative and no jurisdiction decisions omitted in previous annual reports.

Types of cases received 2003-2004

During the year we received 1193 cases, compared with 1117 in 2002/2003. Table 2 shows that appeals of all types accounted for 92% of total cases, down 3% from last year. This year 67% of the cases involved planning permission appeals (compared with 66% in 2002-2003). Appeals related to advertisements accounted for 9% (compared with 12% a year ago). The number of planning call-ins, compulsory purchase and other planning orders was almost double the 2002-2003 figure. A further increase is likely in 2004-2005.

Table 2: Types of cases received

* Rounded figures.
** Includes marine fish and shellfish farms; electricity proposals; flood prevention schemes; nature conservation orders etc

Trends in the planning appeal cases received

In parallel with the overall number of cases, the number of planning permission appeal cases received increased significantly over the previous year (805 this year compared to 734). The types of development involved also changed. Domestic householder appeals increased from 150 to 205. Proposals involving the erection of new single houses increased from 187 to 221. The number of proposals involving 10 or more houses increased from 49 to 75. There was a decline in appeals involving smaller scale business and industrial proposals (from 89 to 56) although appeals involving major business and industrial developments increased slightly (from 11 to 13). The number of appeals lodged for development within green belts defined in the development plan reduced from 45 to 43. Of these, 14 were allowed and 16 were dismissed. The balance of 13 cases remained undetermined at the end of the reporting year.

Major inquiries

In addition to many small-scale but individually important cases, the following were the subject of major or controversial planning appeal inquiries:

• residential developments in Milltimber, Melrose, Stenhousemuir, Kilbarchan and Drumclog;
• housing and retail developments at Shrub Place, Edinburgh;
• a windfarm at Kinross;
• provision of waste facilities at Cardenden, Dalbeattie and Fallin;
• Reconfiguration of a golf course at Cumbernauld.

Besides planning inquiries into major appeals and call-ins there are each year a number of inquiries held to consider objections to orders for the delivery of transport infrastructure and also to the finalised local plans that councils propose to adopt as part of the development plan. These cases involve major proposals such as the M74 extension in Glasgow, Road User Charging in Edinburgh, the Fochabers - Mosstodloch Bypass, or local plans - often for entire districts. Each takes many weeks to hear the evidence involving hundreds of objections. Not only are these inquiries increasing in complexity, but it is often expedient to assign 2 or more reporters for flexibility and to allow concurrent running of sessions in an attempt to reduce the duration. Despite the relatively small numbers in Scotland each year it is these cases that consume the greater part of the Unit's resources. Process improvements, such as those considered in the recent consultation on Modernising Public Local Inquiries, offer the prospect of better management of that inquiry workload.

Table 3: Planning permission appeals received

Method of determination and success rates

Table 4 shows the method of determination of cases and the success rates for different categories. Success in these tables is generally defined as a favourable outcome for the appellant or applicant, in that an appeal is allowed, an application is permitted, or an order is confirmed.

The percentage of delegated appeal cases proceeding by public local inquiry or hearing, 7% (70 of a total of 967 cases) was the same as last year. The proportion of successful appeal cases in this category was 39% (down from 40% last year). The success rate for written submissions appeal cases remained at 32%, giving an overall success rate for delegated appeals of 31% (down from 33% last year).

Of the 9 non-delegated appeals, 1 (or 11%) was allowed compared to 3 (or 27%) last year.

The number of non-appeal cases processed to a decision in 2003-2004 was 62, compared with 57 in the previous year. The overall success rate was 68%, compared with 51% in the previous year.

The Unit handled a slightly higher number of cases (1,038, up from 1,028). The overall success rate was 33% (the same as 2002-2003). The success rate remains remarkably constant, at around one-third of all cases although this masks variations in individual small categories.

Table 4: Success rates by method of determination and type of case

* Includes marine fish and shellfish farms; electricity proposals; flood prevention schemes; nature conservation orders etc
** Includes administrative and no jurisdiction decisions.

Local plans

Planning Authorities projected that 23 local plan inquiries would open in 2003-2004. As it transpired, only 9 local plan inquiries were actually committed. The forecast for 2004-2005 indicates that planning authorities again expect a very large proportion of the Unit's resources to be available for commitment to a programme of local plan inquiries that continues to remain uncertain.

Table 5: Local Plan Inquiries

* Includes one case which proceeded on the basis of written submissions
** Includes extensive work by several reporters on the Rural West Edinburgh Local Plan Inquiry, which did not proceed
*** A proportion of the work continues in the subsequent business year but is shown against the year in which it was generated.

Performance in determining delegated appeals: decisions in 2003-2004

The Unit's efficiency in handling delegated appeals is measured by 5 performance targets related to the most numerous types of cases, and whether the case is dealt with by public local inquiry or by the written submissions procedure.

In 2003-2004, the target for planning appeals proceeding by written submissions (the most numerous category) was significantly exceeded, with 97% of cases (compared with 84% last year) being determined within the target of 20 weeks. Of the 37 appeal cases that were the subject of a public local inquiry, 86% were decided within the 38 week target (compared to 71% last year).

All enforcement notice appeals determined by written submissions and public local inquiries were decided within the targets set. Of the 96 advertisement appeals determined by written submissions, 94% were decided within 17 weeks, compared with 76% last year.

Table 6: Performance in determining delegated appeals

Changes in performance targets and achievements 1999-2004

Table 7 shows that the targets against which the Unit's work is measured have become more stringent over the years. The 'weeks' column indicates the actual time taken to determine our target of 80% of cases. The '%' columns show the percentage of cases determined within our Ministerial targets.

Table 7: Performance targets and achievements

Claims for award of expenses

A total of 104 claims for award of expenses were made during this year, 19 fewer than in the previous year (123). There were 17 claims by planning authorities, all against appellants, compared to 29 last year. These accounted for 16% of all claims, significantly lower than the 24% figure last year. Likewise, the proportion of successful claims by planning authorities, 24% compared with 38% last year, was also significantly lower.

Appellants made 83 claims, compared with 84 last year, all against planning authorities. The 18 claims that were successful represented a 22% success rate, much the same as the 20% recorded last year. None of the claims made by third parties was successful. However, the number of third party claims remained small (4 opposed to 10 last year).

Table 8: Expenses claims

The objective tests for deciding whether the behaviour of any party has been unreasonable remain those set out in SODD Circular 6/1990.

Complaints

During the business year to 31 March 2004 the Unit received 17 letters of complaint, compared to 19 last year. These included concerns about the delay in issuing a decision; availability of reporters to conduct inquiries; claims that material considerations were not taken into account; the conduct of the Reporter; and those unhappy with the decision taken.

All complaints were investigated and responses issued. Most were found to have no justified basis. In those few cases where our work did not meet the expected standard an apology was sent together with an explanation of the circumstances.

Court of Session challenges

The number of Court of Session challenges this year was slightly more than in 2002-2003, but remained within the range of normal variability. More than half the cases lodged during the year were still before the Court at the year end. The Unit continues to meet its target of no more than 1% of all delegated appeals determined by reporters being successfully challenged in the Court, or undefended.

Table 9: Court of Session Challenges

Staff training and development

Due to relocation the Unit faced the prospect of replacing an experienced administrative team and training a large number of new staff. Both new and former members of staff rose to this challenge by supporting each other through on the job training. It is to their credit that performance targets have been maintained in this transition period. Refresher sessions are in place to reinforce initial training and to encourage staff to increase their knowledge and confidence in their new posts. As a Unit we are keen to listen and respond to ideas from our new team and draw on their previous cross-departmental experience. We have therefore set up improvement teams to involve staff in reviewing working practices. Plain English and Customer Care courses, from external providers, will be held to strengthen our commitment to accessibility and customer focus.

Monthly seminars are held for reporters in our new premises to aid professional development and share best practice. The seminars are generally led by reporters to increase their personal development although external participation is adopted as a useful forum to hear from speakers from both sides of the various organisations we deal with. Reporters' development is further assisted by attending externally organised conferences and seminars, including the Planning Inspectorate's Annual Training Week, held at Warwick University.

Overall both administrative staff and reporters have supported each other through a time of significant change and this in itself has proved the greatest developmental achievement over the last year.

Conclusion

The achievement of meeting all our Ministerial targets for timeliness in a year of considerable uncertainty and disruption reflects great credit on the staff of the Unit. My thanks go to all of them, along with my good wishes to those who have chosen to pursue their careers elsewhere in the public service following our move to Falkirk. My thanks also to all appellants, planning authorities and members of the public with whom we have had contact during the year for their patience and co-operation. We look forward to building on those relationships.

James McCulloch
Chief Reporter
Scottish Executive Inquiry Reporters Unit