Written evidence on calls for views on Natural Environment Bill
SCNP & APRS Submission to Call for Views from the Scottish Parliament’s Rural Affairs and Islands Committee,
Submitted to Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill - Scottish Parliament - Citizen Space on 7 May 2025
Part 3 - National Parks
1. Do you agree with proposed changes to the aims of National Parks in the Bill?
Given that Scotland’s National Parks legislation is over 20 years old, the Natural Environment Bill offers a timely opportunity to update it. In the light of two decades of experience of existing Scottish National Parks and the changed context, particularly greater public awareness of the urgent need to address nature loss and climate change, the proposed modernisation of the aims is welcomed.
Part 3, Section 5 of the Bill amends the existing four National Park aims with proposals for slightly more modern and straightforward language. Subsection 5(2) then adds a list giving further detail on what is included within the aims. These are all things that could have been considered to have been included within the wording of the existing aims, (or in the case of recreation was specifically included). However, they are now particularly highlighted as “part of the aims”.
We are glad to see restoring and regenerating biodiversity, and mitigating and adapting to climate change in the wording of the Bill, as this emphasises the role Scotland’s National Parks are expected to play as home to internationally renowned landscapes and wildlife and as models of sustainable development. As such, they should play a leading role in actively supporting nature recovery and contributing to a just transition to a nature positive and net zero Scotland.
We also welcome the specific mention of access in this list and the inclusion of recreation here - without which the proposed removal of ‘recreation’ from the wording of the current third aim would have been of concern.
The final clause (f) which has been added to promote the wellbeing economy side of sustainable development also seems a reasonable addition. However, we feel the proposed wording, which includes the phrase ‘prosperity of individuals’ could be improved to convey the intention better, or perhaps ‘of individuals’ could be removed leaving the focus on communities?
Subsection 5(2) also adds a new duty to have regard to the aims. This is a new duty on Scottish Ministers, a National Park authority, a local authority and any other public body or office holder to have regard to the National Park aims.
We welcome the direction of this change, as it would seem to be against the public interest for a public body to be working within a National Park and to not be actively furthering the aims of the National Park. However, we think that “have regard to” is very weak wording and we would like to see this changed to a duty to “further the aims”. We note that elsewhere in Part 3 the proposals include a change to the existing duty to have regard to the Park Plans to make it more effective, and suggest similarly more active wording should be used in the proposed new duty as well. This would require an amendment to s5(2)(3) of the Natural Environment Bill as introduced. We are aware that a change was made fairly recently to the equivalent National Park duty in England changing it from ‘have regard to the statutory purposes’ to ‘seek to further the statutory purposes’, so such a change is not without precedent in legislation.
There is an omission here we would hope could be remedied at Stage 2. We welcome the fact that the proposals retain section 9(6) of the National Parks (Scotland) Act - this is sometimes referred to as the Sandford Principle or the National Park Principle - which sets out that more weight is to be given to the first National Park aim in situations where there appears to be a conflict between the aims. However, section 9(6) currently only applies to National Park Authorities in the exercise of their functions whereas we suggest the Scottish Government should consider bringing forward an amendment that applies section 9(6) to all bodies or individuals to which the proposed new duty to have regard to the National Park aims applies.
2. Do you agree with new duties around the implementation of National Park Plans that are set out in the Bill?
National Park Authorities have a core purpose of ensuring that the National Park aims are collectively achieved in a co-ordinated way. The key mechanism for catalysing and co-ordinating the development and delivery of a shared vision for the future of the areas that they cover is the Park Plan. The 2000 Act currently requires the Authority to set out in the Plan its policy for managing the National Park and co-ordinating its own functions and the functions of other public bodies so far as they affect the area of the Park. However, other public bodies currently only need to ‘have regard to the National Park Plan’. To more effectively deliver the National Park aims, stronger duties should be placed on all public bodies (“Scottish Ministers, a National Park authority, a local authority and any other public body or office holder”) where their operations or functions affect a National Park, both to further the aims of the Park and to actively support the implementation of the National Park Plan.
We welcome the proposed strengthening of the existing s14 duty from a duty of “have regard to National Park Plans” to “facilitate implementation of National Park Plans”. We strongly agree that public bodies working within or affecting a National Park should be obliged to actively support and contribute to the implementation of National Park Plans. At present, a publicly funded body could note the contents of a National Park Plan yet carry out activities that work against or weaken the implementation of the plan. An obligation for public bodies to support and contribute to the implementation of National Park Plans would promote greater collaboration and ensure that the decisions affecting and services provided within the National Parks consider the National Park aims, so that the mode of delivery is more sympathetic to the landscape and to nature.
This clear proposal by the Scottish Government to strengthen this duty to make it more meaningful, reinforces the argument (made in answer to Question 1) to also strengthen the new duty on public bodies at the new 1(3) to “further the aims”, rather than only ‘to have regard to’.
The proposed changes to duties on public bodies is welcome, however, most land in Scottish National Parks is and will continue to be privately owned and managed. MSPs at Stage 1 might ask Ministers to consider if and how private bodies, particularly when in receipt of public funding, might be encouraged to better align their operations with the National Park Plans.
3. Do you support provisions in the Bill enabling the Scottish Government to make regulations for the issuing of fixed penalty notices for breaches of National Park byelaws?
The Bill makes provision for National Park authorities to issue fixed penalty notices in relation to byelaws which they set. We recognise that this is proposed as a pragmatic and proportionate approach to enforcement of byelaws given that currently enforcement has to be pursued by referral to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS). We understand the logic of what is proposed from the point of view of streamlining enforcement and reducing the burden on the COPFS and the court system. However, the proposed changes beg the question how this will affect engagement by National Parks with the public? Whether, because enforcement becomes easier it is reached for more quickly in cases of irresponsible behaviour, rather than the staged response currently usually deployed by Park rangers of ‘engage, educate, encourage’ and only ‘enforce’ at the end of that process. We hope that the changes made by the Bill will be consistent with enforcement as a backstop, but there may be a risk that making enforcement faster and less onerous could lead to a more enforcement-focused service, potentially undermining other engagement with the public and changing the nature of the role of rangers. As the Bill progresses, more clarity could be sought on policy intentions for the use of these powers and if this could be set out in guidance and arrangements for future monitoring of how the powers are used.
4. Is there anything else you would like to say about Part 3 of the Bill on National Parks?
Given their statutory aims - both as they currently stand and as is being proposed - the improvement and management of access is in practice an absolutely critical responsibility of National Park Authorities. They therefore need to be armed to do this as well and easily as possible. Anomalies like the RoW position in the Cairngorms are therefore very unhelpful.
High quality visitor management, and well coordinated access is key to reaping the health and wellbeing benefits of National Parks without unduly disrupting other land using activities and (for example) minimising the growing risks of wildfires that come with our changing climate.We very much welcome the proposed tidying up of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 via subsection 8 of the Natural Environment Bill. This corrects an omission from the 2003 Act, and would allow, via their designation orders, any new National Park authorities to be put on the same footing as local authorities under the Act and become access authorities. This simply reflects the policy intention of the first two National Park authorities and future-proofs the legislation.
A related access issue which could potentially also be tidied up in this Bill is the anomaly of Rights of Ways (RoW) continuing to be the responsibility of the local authorities. Responsibility for RoWs seems to be historically related to Town and Country planning powers - so as in the Cairngorms, when an National Park authority doesn’t have full planning powers resolving access problems involving RoWs requires the local authority to be involved too. Whilst referring matters to the local authority is do-able, given that National Park authorities can span several local authorities and that local authorities vary as to capacity to deal with access issues, it is less efficient than it could be.
If, as it seems, this is simply an unintended consequence of the different statutory planning status of the two National Parks and given there could be further potential variation on the planning model for National Park Authorities in future, then Ministers should be invited to bring forward amendments at stage 2 which, in effect, confers the responsibility for RoWs equally on National Park authorities as access authorities, no matter what the statutory planning model of each Park is.
Given their statutory aims, both as they currently stand and as is being proposed, the improvement and management of access is in practice an absolutely critical responsibility of National Park Authorities. They therefore need to be armed to do this as well and easily as possible. Anomalies like the RoW position in the Cairngorms are therefore very unhelpful. High quality visitor management, and well coordinated access is key to reaping the health and wellbeing benefits of National Parks without unduly disrupting other land using activities and (for example) minimising the growing risks of wildfires that come with our changing climate.
Information about your organisation
SCNP and APRS, have campaigned together for National Parks in Scotland for many years, making the case that Scotland’s beautiful and varied landscapes deserve more recognition and protection.
Action to Protect Rural Scotland, APRS, is Scotland’s longest established environmental charity being founded in 1926 to protect Scotland’s world renowned landscapes and the amenity of the countryside. We changed our name from The Association for the Protection of Rural Scotland in 2023. Action to Protect Rural Scotland - Scottish Charity Number SC016139; a Scottish Charitable Company, Association for the Protection of Rural Scotland, limited by guarantee, registered no 154563. For more information see: aprs.scot
The Scottish Campaign for National Parks (SCNP) is the national charity that campaigns to protect and promote the cause of and case for National Parks in Scotland. Scottish registered charity number SCO31008. For more information see https://www.scnp.org.uk