I am grateful for the chance to speak in the debate at this early stage in the policy process.

Like others, I welcome the Executive’s determination to modernise Scotland’s planning system.

We have an admirable white paper, which, at its heart, embraces the house doctor’s famous injunction to declutter, declutter, declutter.

I will dwell on the true test of the effectiveness of any future legislation on the matter.

We do ourselves a disservice if we see the challenge that currently faces the planning system as that of green versus brown, when the real challenge is operational effectiveness versus increasing sclerosis, a point that Karen Whitefield made eloquently in her thoughtful speech.

We have the chance to refute the charge that is often levelled against the Parliament that new legislation by its nature leads to bigger bureaucracy rather than better processes.

I caution the Opposition parties against any undue glibness.

Both the SNP and the Tories devoted fewer than 30 words in their May manifestos to planning reform, which is hardly a serious engagement with the issue.

The Parliament’s task, which will determine whether the bill succeeds in overcoming the frustrations that the planning system causes, will be to take the current delay, dysfunction and discredit out of the system and to replace it with planning purpose, proportion and pride.

Let me deal first with the delay, the dysfunction and the discredit that currently disfigure the system.

On the delay, last year only two of 32 local authorities met the target of determining 80 per cent of major applications within four months.

The Executive’s planning unit had to admit that the performance of two thirds of planning authorities in relation to such applications was worse than in the previous year.

What about the dysfunction?

Nearly a third of Scotland does not have an up-to-date local plan.

Finally, there is the discredit.

We set local authorities five national targets for planning, but only one of them deals with major applications; all the others deal overwhelmingly with individual householder applications.

That is where we must declutter.

How many of us, whatever our perspective on the issue, can say, hand on heart, that the big issue in our surgeries is whether individual householders can or cannot build a porch or a conservatory?

The weighting of national targets towards individual applications contributes hugely to the delay and the clutter, but it is not, crucially, what causes the frustration, the anger or the pervasive sense of injustice.

To get progress, we must replace all that delay, dysfunction and discredit with purpose, proportion and pride.

First, on purpose, the Executive is right to move towards having a hierarchy of targets, but it should not perversely encourage local authorities to meet targets for porches, for example, while spreading frustration about bigger applications.

Secondly, on proportion, we need local plans that are fit for purpose, as Sarah Boyack said.

We also need a willingness to review whether the local householder application process can be simplified to free up time for the genuinely big issues that concern us all and to put in place delivery strategies for local plans that cover infrastructure needs and the need for housing land.

Thirdly, if we are going to bring pride to the system, I hope that the Executive will consider acting on its own research, which was published by Tribal HCH Ltd last month and which recommended that local authorities provide a named point of contact and a target date for planning decisions and consider including the design element in planning applications to ensure that in future we have high architectural standards.

To improve the management of conflicts in the planning system, we must first put in place a system that works.

We have before us a white paper that lays important foundations.

The Executive’s own subsequent research by Tribal demonstrates how we can move forward on associated issues, such as land supply, which also desperately need to be addressed.

In the weeks ahead, I encourage ministers to maintain the same vigour for what we are going to stop doing as for the new things that we are going to start doing.

The Executive front-bench team deserves considerable credit for tackling the tough issues and replacing the delays of the past with action and new proposals.

As they consider the issues further in the weeks ahead, I urge them to follow the house doctor’s injunction to declutter, declutter, declutter. I am grateful for the chance to speak in the debate at this early stage in the policy process.Like others, I welcome the Executive’s determination to modernise Scotland’s planning system.

We have an admirable white paper, which, at its heart, embraces the house doctor’s famous injunction to declutter, declutter, declutter.

I will dwell on the true test of the effectiveness of any future legislation on the matter.

We do ourselves a disservice if we see the challenge that currently faces the planning system as that of green versus brown, when the real challenge is operational effectiveness versus increasing sclerosis, a point that Karen Whitefield made eloquently in her thoughtful speech.

We have the chance to refute the charge that is often levelled against the Parliament that new legislation by its nature leads to bigger bureaucracy rather than better processes.

I caution the Opposition parties against any undue glibness.

Both the SNP and the Tories devoted fewer than 30 words in their May manifestos to planning reform, which is hardly a serious engagement with the issue.

The Parliament’s task, which will determine whether the bill succeeds in overcoming the frustrations that the planning system causes, will be to take the current delay, dysfunction and discredit out of the system and to replace it with planning purpose, proportion and pride.

Let me deal first with the delay, the dysfunction and the discredit that currently disfigure the system.

On the delay, last year only two of 32 local authorities met the target of determining 80 per cent of major applications within four months.

The Executive’s planning unit had to admit that the performance of two thirds of planning authorities in relation to such applications was worse than in the previous year.

What about the dysfunction?

Nearly a third of Scotland does not have an up-to-date local plan.

Finally, there is the discredit.

We set local authorities five national targets for planning, but only one of them deals with major applications; all the others deal overwhelmingly with individual householder applications.

That is where we must declutter.

How many of us, whatever our perspective on the issue, can say, hand on heart, that the big issue in our surgeries is whether individual householders can or cannot build a porch or a conservatory?

The weighting of national targets towards individual applications contributes hugely to the delay and the clutter, but it is not, crucially, what causes the frustration, the anger or the pervasive sense of injustice.

To get progress, we must replace all that delay, dysfunction and discredit with purpose, proportion and pride.

First, on purpose, the Executive is right to move towards having a hierarchy of targets, but it should not perversely encourage local authorities to meet targets for porches, for example, while spreading frustration about bigger applications.

Secondly, on proportion, we need local plans that are fit for purpose, as Sarah Boyack said.

We also need a willingness to review whether the local householder application process can be simplified to free up time for the genuinely big issues that concern us all and to put in place delivery strategies for local plans that cover infrastructure needs and the need for housing land.

Thirdly, if we are going to bring pride to the system, I hope that the Executive will consider acting on its own research, which was published by Tribal HCH Ltd last month and which recommended that local authorities provide a named point of contact and a target date for planning decisions and consider including the design element in planning applications to ensure that in future we have high architectural standards.

To improve the management of conflicts in the planning system, we must first put in place a system that works.

We have before us a white paper that lays important foundations.

The Executive’s own subsequent research by Tribal demonstrates how we can move forward on associated issues, such as land supply, which also desperately need to be addressed.

In the weeks ahead, I encourage ministers to maintain the same vigour for what we are going to stop doing as for the new things that we are going to start doing.

The Executive front-bench team deserves considerable credit for tackling the tough issues and replacing the delays of the past with action and new proposals.

As they consider the issues further in the weeks ahead, I urge them to follow the house doctor’s injunction to declutter, declutter, declutter.