Memorandum from The Royal Town Planning
Institute in Scotland (12.5.98)
INQUIRY INTO
INWARD AND
OUTWARD INVESTMENT
The Institute, through its Scottish Office,
has noted with interest the proposal to conduct an inquiry into
inward and outward investment. It is unable to submit detailed
evidence through pressure of work on devolution and the large
number of Government and public body consultations which are currently
taking place on matters related to planning. Indeed, the need
for the planning system to assist the delivery of sustainable
development means that it is at the heart of many public policy
reviews and this is no different for inward investment.
I hope therefore that the following brief comments
will be of assistance to the committee to alert them to issues
which the Institute believes are important.
Inward investment has been of great benefit
to Scotland over the post war years and many lessons have been
learned about how to ensure that it is economically sustainable.
The committee will no doubt wish to look at the range of policy
options for future promotion of inward investment to continue
to reap the benefits in terms of job creation and circulating
wealth in communities in Scotland in the face of greater competition
across Europe and the world. The Institute would anticipate that
these options might continue to include large greenfield locations
accessible to main roads as well as other types of siting requirements.
Whatever siting criteria may be favoured, the
Institute is in no doubt that they will involve pressure to compromise
principles of environmental and social sustainability. These are
issues which the committee must therefore investigate as an essential
part of the inquiry.
In commending the importance of environmental
and social sustainability, the Institute would emphasise that
it considers strongly that the aim of the planning system, which
has served the country well for 50 years, is to secure all the
benefits of sustainable development for a thriving economy and
society.
The four issues which the Institute would draw
to the attention of the committee are:
In the first place, one of the main prerequisites
for attracting inward investment is the availability of suitable
sites but the supply of these has generally been severely restricted
and delayed through the need to resolve issues such as planning,
acquisition, servicing and environmental treatment which have
a long lead time. The identification of suitable sites is now
the more difficult in view of the need to change the emphasis
on accessibility to main roads to one of accessibility to rail
and bus options, particularly for commuter traffic.
Secondly, the consequence of the above issue
is that it is particularly important to maximise the possibilities
of inward investment on derelict or redevelopment sites. The recent
search for new strategic industrial sites promoted by the Glasgow
and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan Committee under the National
Planning Policy Guidelines has identified five such brownfield
opportunities.
Thirdly, the essence of social sustainability,
which is underpinned by environmental sustainability, is community
self containment and the location of homes and jobs in closer
proximity. This principle may not suit the large scale of many
inward investment solutions but the committee is commended to
consider how a small scale approach can be applied.
Fourthly, the Institute would stress that the
planning system remains the only comprehensive policy mechanism
for assimilating the ever wider range of locational and siting
issues which relate to inward investment and also for providing
a clear framework of land use policy which can guide investment
in infrastructure, commercial property, environmental treatment
and community facilities. The planning system needs to be more
central to the processes of the enterprise agencies which should
not seek to take advantage of the reluctance of elected members
on planning committees to turn down investment opportunities which
the agencies help to create, where they are less sustainable or
contrary to planning policy.
| 
