Image source, bbc

MSPs reject all of the rights of appeal amendments.

Image source, bbc

Kevin Stewart says quite simply we don't support the introduction of a third party right of appeal.

The minister insists he wants people to be involved.

Labour MSP Neil Findlay asks what is fair about a developer having the right of appeall but the community does not.

Mr Stewart insists developers do not elect councilors whereas communities do.

He reiterates he is firmly against the appeal rights developments.

Image source, bbc

Tory MSP Murdo Fraser says he is a veteran of the debates in Session 2 on the previous Planning Bill.

Mr Fraser points out at that time the SNP called for equal right of appeal and it was Labour that held the line against it.

He says: "There is one word for the Labour position today and that is opportunism."

The Tory MSP says he is very sympathetic to calls by communities who feel the planning system is weighted against them.

However his sympathy does not extend to third party right of appeal which he says comes at the end of the process.

Mr Fraser says it would add additional delay and cost.

Labour MSP Alex Rowley says his amendments seek to introduce equal rights of appeal when an application decision does not align with the local development plan.

Our proposals also seek to strengthen the plan-led system by limiting the applicants right of appeal, he adds.

Front-loading consultation does not work according to the government's own consultation Mr Rowley argues.

A weak link between public input and decision making means there is little incentive for the public to get involved in planning the Labour MSP says.

It is disappointing this bill does nothing to shift power away from developers and ministers and towards communities, he adds.

Image source, bbc

Green MSP Andy Wightman speaks to his amendments on the right to appeal against planning decisions.

Current rights to appeal date back to the 1947 Act he explains.

Mr Wightman says in a proper planning led system there should be no right of appeal at all, as happens in some continental European countries.

He says his amendment would move us closer to a planning led system.

Here's a reminder of where to find out what the amendments actually say:

• marshalled list of amendments, external
• and their groupings, external

Labour MSP Alex Rowley explains his next amendment would require planning authorities to record whether an application complies with a local development plan.

If it does not, they must say why it was still considered in the public interest he argues.

Mr Stewart's amendment attempts to strip out the entire section Mr Rowley is seeking to amend.

Graham Simpson says his party intends to vote against the minister's amendment and Mr Rowley's amendment too.

Mr Rowley withdraws his amendment and the minister's is defeated by 63 votes to 58 - the closest vote on the Planning Bill yet.

Kevin Stewart speaks to his amendments in Group 27: Call-in of applications by Scottish Ministers.

Mr Stewart explains a call-in is a power he takes seriously and uses sparingly.

However sometimes the government has to, he adds.

The minister welcomes discussions with Green MSP Mark Ruskell and consensus reigns.

The communities minister says the needs of farmers and foresters must be considered.

Mr Mountain calls for a standard or guidance to be set out for this purpose.

Kevin Stewart says the government will take this on board and consider it.

But he insists decisions about permitted development rights need to be taken following careful consideration about impacts and therefore the place to consider them is via General Permitted Development Orders, not this bill.

Image source, bbc

Tory MSP Edward Mountain speaks to the amendments regarding hill tracks and declares he is a surveyor.

The Tory MSP tells MSPs not to be under any illusion any track can be built anywhere.

Mr Mountain says planning authorities often object and call the application in for full consultation,.

He says Mr Wightman's amendments are not required and says the Green MSP is seeking to ban that which is already banned.

The next group of amendments is regarding hill tracks.

Green MSP Andy Wightman says there are ongoing problems, and a failure of the planning system to deal with it, regarding hill tracks.

None of my amendments impact permitted developments for the farming and forestry industry, he explains.

Private ways for field sport use required planning permissions he adds.

He says some tracks should be subject to further planning scrutiny, highlighting a loophole which is often used by people claiming tracks are for farms when they are in fact for field sports.

A short pathway to provide access to wheelchair users requires full planning consent but a vehicle track bulldozed up the side of mountains does not and it is time that is changed, Mr Wightman concludes.

Kevin Stewart argues against Mr Cole-Hamilton's amendment, asking who knows how long fibre will be the preferred technology.

The amendments on Changing Places toilets are agreed unanimously.

But the Lib Dem amendment falls, with 24 votes for, 89 votes against and six abstentions.

Ms Beamish's amendment on cycling facilities is also not agreed to (29 for and 88 against).