Latest developments in Scottish Planning and Environmental Law

spel-179Moves to transform the Scottish planning system continue to progress slowly, with a new consultation published on 10 January 2017 by the Scottish Government focused on 20 proposals for improving the system. This follows in the wake of May 2016’s independent report ‘Empowering planning to deliver great places’, and despite the fact that a number of the “immediate actions” identified by the Government in its response to the review, are still to be completed.

The latest issue of Scottish Planning and Environmental Law Journal contains reaction to the consultation paper from stakeholders and also considers how the main proposals in the consultation align with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. The consultation closes 4 April 2017.

Case law update and commentary

The February 2017 issue also includes articles focusing on:

  • The reduced recognition of planning within the Scottish economic policy environment, as reflected in the outputs of the Council of Economic Advisers
  • Freedom of Information and Registered Social Landlords
  • Scottish Government proposals to raise planning fees
  • The UK Government’s new Industrial Strategy and land-use planning
  • Amendments to the CAR Regulations – Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2011/209
  • Prematurity and a ‘plan-led’ system, as seen in the appeal decision for Taylor Wimpey UK Ltd v The Scottish Ministers

There is also discussion of recent case law and environmental law.

Valued for over 30 years

SPEL Journal (Scottish Planning & Environmental Law) launched over 30 years ago and is one of the leading information sources on land use planning and environmental legislation across the country. The bi-monthly journal is written by a wide range of subject experts.

Every issue includes accessible commentary on topical subjects and current issues; details of new legislation and significant court cases; expert comment on key planning appeal decisions, government circulars and guidance; as well as notes about ombudsman cases and book reviews.


An annual subscription to SPEL Journal is £145. For further details or a sample copy, please contact Christine Eccleson, SPEL Journal’s Advertising Manager, on 0141 574 1920 or email christine.eccleson@Idoxgroup.com.

Latest news in Scottish planning and environmental law

spel 175 imageWith a new SNP minority government and the publication of an independent review of the Scottish planning system, 2016 looks like it could herald significant change for the planning profession north of the border.

The review found that there needs to be “a strong commitment to change existing practices and culture, and to re-focus the profession’s improvement agenda”. Whether there is the political will or the capability to take forward some of the more “game changing” proposals remains to be seen. What is certain is that we will see a large amount of soul-searching as to why previous calls for culture change have failed to be realised in practice.

Reflecting on case law

The Knowledge Exchange publishes a bi-monthly journal covering all aspects of planning and environmental law in Scotland. SPEL Journal (Scottish Planning & Environmental Law) launched over 30 years ago and is one of the leading information sources on land use planning and environmental legislation across the country.

A key part of our remit is to provide commentary on significant case law. We also provide a forum for consideration of issues affecting the planning system, from the point of view of solicitors, planners and academics.

Key court cases examined in the June edition include:

  • Quashing of the Aberdeen City and Shire Strategic Development Planning Authority’s ‘Supplementary Guidance – Strategic Transport Fund’
  • Interpretation of performance guarantee bonds, in relation to restoration obligations (South Lanarkshire Council v Coface SA)
  • The Forth Crossing Act 2011: compensation for the temporary possession of land and Certificates of Appropriate Alternative Development
  • Quashing of green belt school permission (St Andrews Environmental Protection Association Ltd v Fife Council)
  • Two cases clarifying protective expensive orders
  • Interpretation of ‘for public use’ and the concept of public benefit (Hunt v Moray Council)
  • The meaning of ‘waste’ and the proper interpretation of ‘recovery’ in the Waste Framework Directive.

There are also articles focusing on:

  • The role of planning in addressing demographic change as seen in the need for retirement housing Greg Lloyd, Ulster University & Wageningen University
  • New guidance on the valuation of land for affordable housing Andrew McCafferty, Andrew McCafferty Associates
  • Commentary on new guidance on improving energy performance and emissions in existing non-domestic buildings Laura L Tainsh, Davidson Chalmers LLP
  • Commentary on recent planning obligation appeals John Watchman, Watchman & Co

Written by a wide range of subject experts, SPEL Journal includes accessible commentary on topical subjects and current issues. Given the Planning Review, there is still much to consider and debate, both within the framework of existing legislation, policy and guidance and in the context of an anticipated programme of further reform in Scotland.


An annual subscription to SPEL Journal is £145. For further details or a sample copy, please contact Christine Eccleson, SPEL Journal’s Advertising Manager, on 0141 574 1905 or email christine.eccleson@Idoxgroup.com.

SPEL Journal is read by decision makers in Scottish planning authorities, planning law practices, planning consultancies, surveyors, civil engineers, environmental managers and developers across Scotland. It is also valued by many practitioners outside of Scotland who need to keep abreast of developments.

Hot topics in Scottish planning and environmental law

spel feb headerThe Knowledge Exchange publishes a bi-monthly journal covering all aspects of planning and environmental law in Scotland. SPEL Journal (Scottish Planning & Environmental Law) launched over 30 years ago and is one of the leading information sources on land use planning and environmental legislation across the country.

Our latest edition of SPEL includes articles focusing on:

  • Outcomes of the 2015 UN Climate Change Conference
  • The practical experience of delivering Planning Permissions in Principle
  • Wild land maps and their impact on planning law and policy
  • Hut development and the planning system – a significant shift.

Key court cases examined in the February edition include:

  • Sally Carroll v Scottish Borders Council – A wind turbine case which has clarified the role of Local Review Boards.
  • Stewart Milne Group Ltd v The Scottish Ministers – An appeal against refusal for residential development, which further consolidates the position adopted by the Supreme Court in Tesco Stores Ltd v Dundee City Council [2012].
  • The John Muir Trust v The Scottish Ministers – Wind farm consent has been reduced, as a result of the processes followed in the case for consideration of responses from consultative bodies.

SPEL was launched in 1980 as ‘Scottish Planning Law & Practice’, to be a journal of record of Scottish planning. When it became apparent that the emerging field of environmental law was strongly linked to land use planning, the name of our journal changed to reflect this.

Written by a wide range of subject experts, SPEL Journal includes accessible commentary on topical subjects and current issues; details of new legislation and significant court cases; expert comment on key planning appeal decisions, government circulars and guidance; as well as notes about ombudsman cases and book reviews.

SPEL Journal is read by decision makers in Scottish planning authorities, planning law practices, planning consultancies, architects, surveyors, civil engineers, environmental managers and developers across Scotland. It is also valued by many practitioners outside of Scotland who need to keep abreast of developments.


An annual subscription to SPEL Journal is £145. For further details or a sample copy, please contact Christine Eccleson, SPEL Journal’s Advertising Manager, on 0141 574 1905 or email christine.eccleson@Idoxgroup.com.

Biodiversity in the UK – it’s not just about habitat protection but how we live our lives

By Morwen Johnson

When we talk about preserving biodiversity many people will assume it’s something that’s only an issue in far-flung places like the Amazon rainforest. England however has at least 55,000 species of animals, plants and fungi, and over a thousand of these are at risk. This includes familiar species such as hedgehogs, red squirrels, the small tortoiseshell butterfly, and birds such as house sparrows and starlings.

Small changes can make a big difference

Protecting habitats is a vital part of conservation – and the UK is lucky to have such diverse landscapes. While sites of special scientific interest (SSSIs), areas of outstanding natural beauty and national parks all provide legal protection for the environment, it’s not all about large-scale conservation. Biodiversity can be supported at the local or neighbourhood level too.

Green infrastructure can help create habitat corridors for wildlife. We wrote recently about a new partnership between the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and Barratt Developments looking at how the design of new housing developments can be wildlife-friendly. Another industry initiative is the BIG Challenge which encourages developers to add one new biodiversity enhancement to their construction site, development or existing building.

The shift to neighbourhood planning has also given communities more opportunities to improve their local environment. As well as mapping and protecting existing green assets, neighbourhood plans also enable communities to enhance or create new habitat areas.

This grassroots interest in the environment is reflected in other alternative approaches to making conservation relevant to the public, many of whom live in towns and cities.

Headlines were created earlier this year, with the suggestion that London should be rebranded as the Greater London National Park City. Many people don’t realise that 47% of London is already green space and has over eight million trees. The London Assembly has supported the campaign, with Assembly Member Jenny Jones saying in June: “This initiative could ensure that nature is included in every aspect of London’s urban fabric.

Inspiration from further afield can be found in the Rouge National Urban Park which was formally established in Canada in May 2015. A ‘national urban park’ is a new category in Parks Canada’s protected areas alongside national parks, national historic sites and national marine conservation areas.

Biodiversity offsetting

While this is all positive news, there is a potentially different story emerging at the same time. In England, DEFRA consulted on the idea of biodiversity offsetting in 2013. This is a market-based mechanism that aims to compensate for biodiversity loss as a result of development, through conservation activities that deliver an equivalent amount of biodiversity elsewhere. The results of the consultation have still not been published, but it may be that the idea is still on the government’s agenda.

The question of whether a monetary value can be placed on biodiversity or whether one established habitat can just be replaced by another one, is controversial. The British Ecological Society reported on recent research which identified the risks of implementing offsetting without fully understanding the consequences. How the government chooses to take biodiversity offsetting forward will be a key test of the principle of evidence-based policymaking, and their wider approach to the environment.

Social aspects of biodiversity policy

In June 2015 the Scottish Government published Scotland’s Biodiversity: a Route Map to 2020 setting out how the goals in Scotland’s biodiversity strategy are to be achieved. Seven main pressures are identified: pollution, land-use intensification and modification, spread of invasive species and wildlife disease, lack of recognition of the value of nature, disconnection with nature, climate change, and marine exploitation.

Writing in August’s issue of the Scottish Planning and Environmental Law Journal, Professor Colin Reid of the University of Dundee notes that two of the priorities “deal with our relationship with nature rather than direct physical impact.” This suggests an appreciation that protecting our environment “calls for a pervasive change of mind-set as opposed to simply stopping particular harmful activities.”

Professor Reid also says that the focus on actions related to natural capital and greenspace elements reflect a “greater emphasis on the pervasive and social aspects of biodiversity policy.”

A healthy natural environment can only be achieved if regard for nature is integrated into how we live our lives. Biodiversity policy is now making this connection more explicit and the challenge, perhaps, is to ensure that this is reciprocated in other areas, such as planning”.


Reference

Colin T Reid ‘Big steps for biodiversity‘ IN Scottish Planning and Environmental Law Journal, No 170 Aug 2015, p78

Morwen Johnson is Managing Editor of Scottish Planning and Environmental Law Journal.

If you enjoyed this blog, read our other recent articles:

The changing landscape of planning: views from the Scottish Planning and Environmental Law Conference 2015

The Scottish Planning and Environmental Law Journal (SPEL) held its annual conference in Edinburgh on 17th September. This year’s theme was “the changing landscape of planning”.

Rebecca Jackson, 2015

Photo: Rebecca Jackson

The death of strategic planning?

The keynote speech of this year’s conference was delivered by Professor Greg Lloyd, Emeritus Professor of Urban Planning, Ulster University. He outlined a concept of ‘landscapes of planning’, taking delegates on a whistle-stop tour of what he viewed as the four landscapes of modern planning: post WWII; post 1979; post 1997; and post 2011.

This reflected a journey from post-war social democratic principles, to immature new liberalism under Thatcher, to a third way synthesis under Blairite Labour and what he described as ‘pure unadulterated Neoliberalism’ post-recession.

Professor Lloyd argued that we will soon be transitioning into a fifth landscape which may see the ‘de-coupling of capitalism and democracy’; as the state becomes smaller and more interested in pursuing private rather than public interest (he specifically referenced books by Mason, 2015 and Streck, 2014).

He emphasised the need for planners to be aware of these transitions and for the profession to attempt to remove itself from the current path dependent, money driven culture. Otherwise it would result, he argued, in “reactionary, short term planning; the death of strategic planning and the rise of the know nothing school.”

Unconventional gas … a need to build public trust

The second topic of the morning was a discussion about planning’s future relationship with energy, particularly unconventional gas. Public controversy in the UK over fracking has received considerable news coverage in the last few months. The Scottish Government also announced in January a moratorium on granting planning consents for unconventional oil and gas developments, including fracking, while further research and a public consultation are carried out.

Tom Pickering from INEOS Upstream presented on INEOS specific practices, while Sandy Telfer, DLA Piper Scotland, discussed the impact of increased regulation on the contamination of water supply at shale drilling sites in Pennsylvania.

The key thing to come out of these presentations, and the questions from the floor which followed, was the emphasis on education and making information accessible to members of the public to gain their trust on the subject of fracking and horizontal drilling.

Rebecca Jackson, 2015

Photo: Rebecca Jackson

Linking community and spatial planning …”it’s not rocket science”

Following a quick coffee break the next session was delivered by Nick Wright, Principal, Nick Wright Planning and Karl Doroszenko, development planning and regeneration manager at East Ayrshire Council. They spoke on community planning and spatial planning in Scotland and how it should, and can, work effectively to deliver better services for communities.

Nick Wright gave an update on research by the RTPI on the benefit of linking spatial and community planning. This was followed by Karl Doroszenko who spoke about the experience of East Ayrshire Council and the creation of their community planning partnership.

The presentations provided a useful insight for delegates, particularly planners, as to how they could integrate shared planning into their practices. Karl spoke at length about cooperation and the benefit this had on delivering services for the local community in East Ayrshire.

Just before lunch there was the first round up of Planning Case Law delivered by Maurice O’Carroll, Advocate at Terra Firma Chambers.

Priorities and game changers in the next parliament … “planners have an important role to play”

The afternoon session began with Stefano Smith, Vice Convenor of RTPI Scotland, looking at priorities and game changers in the next Parliament. He spoke of the need for planners to discuss and engage with the 2016 election in Scotland. It is planners themselves who need to take responsibility for promoting the importance of planners and planning in order to generate public discussion about the planning system.

He identified 7 key themes which the RTPI believe should shape how planning is approached in the next parliament. He emphasised the necessity for planning to realise its full potential and to work towards key priorities to deliver planning effectively.

Rebecca Jackson, 2015. Stefano Smith addresses the conference.

Photo: Rebecca Jackson, 2015. Stefano Smith addresses the conference.

“We need radical change, centred on land use and management”

Following Stefano Smith, three speakers considered the priority actions of land use and delivering land for new homes in Scotland. Blair Melville of Turley began by outlining the housing situation in Scotland. He commented that planners are using the economy as an excuse not to plan effectively for housing but that this should not be the way forward for planning in Scotland.

Robin Holder, MD of HolderPlanning then reflected on whether planning was helping or hindering the delivery of housing. Housing land supply has been an eternal argument for planners, which has led to a large shortfall in housing supply. He suggested a new approach where there is a move away from regional Strategic Development Plans and Main Issues Reports, which he saw as a drag on the planning process, in favour of local community-based development plans which could be consulted on instead.

Professor David Adams rounded off the discussion and put it to delegates that they should be taking a more radical approach to land use in order to reform planning. He commented that planners need to rediscover the fundamental link between use of land and planning. He looked specifically at the Land Reform Review Group and their suggestions on Compulsory Sale Orders and the creation of a new Housing Land Corporation for Scotland in the proposals being considered currently in the 2015 Land Reform Bill.

Rebecca Jackson, 2015. Speakers take questions from the floor

Rebecca Jackson, 2015. Speakers take questions from the floor

Continuous improvement in the planning system

The final session of the afternoon was given by David Leslie, Acting Head of Planning and Building Standards at Edinburgh City Council who gave his reflections on continuous improvement in the planning system in Scotland and how joint working and innovation in future projects can drive planning forward. He commented that both transformational and cultural improvement is needed to promote effective planning.

Finally there was a second roundup of planning case law delivered by Alasdair Sutherland, an advocate at Terra Firma Chambers.

What is the future of planning in Scotland?

A key message which emerged regularly throughout the day was the question of consultation: how do planners strike the balance between consulting fully with a community and creating a quick planning process which sees decisions reached quickly and clearly.

Another was the question of land in Scotland and how we can maximise its use to help achieve the outcomes set out in the national planning framework.

A third key theme was how local communities can be integrated into the planning system more – are community planning partnerships the way forward or is there another way?

And finally how do we review and evaluate planning – should central government be taking a greater role in ensuring that outcomes are met and concerns of the public are taken into account?

The day provided an opportunity for individuals involved in the planning sector to get together to share ideas and understanding about how planning in Scotland should work and the changing nature and demands of planning. The topics covered drew together a diverse range of themes, and it was good to see delegates and speakers interacting and debating. As the planning process in Scotland continues to adapt to meet new challenges in the future, it’s clear that Scottish Planning and Environmental Law Journal will remain at the forefront of commentary and insight.


Follow us on Twitter to see what developments in public and social policy are interesting our research team.

Read our other recent articles on planning:

The changing landscape of planning: Scottish Planning & Environmental Law Conference 2015

spel conference image 2By Morwen Johnson

This year’s SPEL Conference is on Thursday 17 September in Edinburgh, and we’re finalising an insightful programme. In a fast moving economic and political environment, the last 12 months has witnessed many developments which impact on the planning system. This year’s conference will provide a space for the planning and environmental law community to discuss and debate these.

Key topics

Key issues to be explored include planning issues around unconventional gas. Public controversy in the UK over fracking has received considerable news coverage in the last few months. Just two weeks ago, the shale gas firm Cuadrilla announced it was to appeal against the decision by Lancashire County Council to refuse permission to drill and frack at two sites in the county (Little Plumpton and Roseacre Wood on the Fylde Coast). The Scottish Government also announced in January a moratorium on granting planning consents for unconventional oil and gas developments, including fracking, while further research and a public consultation are carried out. We’re bringing together representatives from the legal and business viewpoints at the conference to explore the implications.

Another hot topic is how the planning system can ensure the delivery of housing land. Neil Collar from Brodies LLP wrote in the last issue of Scottish Planning and Environmental Law Journal about how planning authorities and developers both have a role to play. From a practitioner point of view, he highlighted that local planning authorities need to address development promotion – not just identifying sites in in plans but taking a proactive approach to delivery, for example addressing issues such as multiple ownership or infrastructure requirements at an early stage. The SPEL Conference will explore this in more depth.

As usual we’ll also be reflecting on national planning policy, and the programme of planning modernisation. We’ve been running the SPEL conference for nearly 20 years and in this time it has gained a reputation for being a forum for open and critical debate about the operation of the planning system in Scotland.

Conference programme

The programme features a broad range of speakers, bringing perspectives from the private sector, local government planning, academia and central government to bear on the issues.

Confirmed key speakers include:

  • Professor David Adams, Ian Mactaggart Chair of Property and Urban Studies, University of Glasgow
  • David Leslie, Acting Head of Planning and Building Standards, The City of Edinburgh Council
  • Nick Wright, Nick Wright Planning and due to be Convenor, RTPI Scotland in 2016
  • Maurice O’Carroll, Advocate, Terra Firma Chambers
  • Alasdair Sutherland, Advocate, Terra Firma Chambers

We’re also delighted that Gordon Steele, QC, will be chairing the conference for us.

If you’re interested in planning or environmental law in Scotland then SPEL Conference 2015 is the perfect chance to hear about the latest developments and network with others.


The 2015 Scottish Planning and Environmental Law Conference is on 17 September at the COSLA Conference Centre, Edinburgh.

The full conference programme and booking form are available here.

Morwen Johnson is the Managing Editor of Scottish Planning and Environmental Law Journal.

Who decides and interprets planning policy … planners or lawyers?

Image from Flickr user Sebastian Niedlich, licensed for reuse under a Creative Commons License

Image via Flickr user Sebastian Niedlich, licensed for reuse under a Creative Commons License

By Morwen Johnson

Nathalie Lieven QC, barrister at Landmark Chambers, spoke at the RTPI’s 2015 Planning Convention on the shifting relationship between planners, policymakers and lawyers. Nathalie regularly appears at public inquiries and planning challenges in the High Court, appearing for both developers and local authorities.

Discussing the massive upsurge in litigation in planning, personified in the creation of the Planning Court in 2014, Nathalie suggested there had been a power grab by lawyers over the planning system in the last few years. She highlighted two main reasons: the decision of the Supreme Court in Tesco v Dundee City Council [2012] UKSC 13, and the introduction in England of the National Planning Policy Framework (‘NPPF’).

Recent shift in power

Prior to the Tesco case, interpretation of planning policy was seen as the task of the decision-maker. Cases only went to court if this interpretation was seen as ‘unreasonable’. This approach makes sense if you consider that planning policy tends not to have the level of semantic detail that is expected in law, and is also a recognition that application of policy can be different in different contexts.

The Supreme Court ruling however was that interpretation of policy in the case was a matter for the court and policy should be interpreted objectively. The aim may have been to create intellectual clarity and better decision-making, but the ruling has coincided with the introduction of NPPF, which is in some parts obscurely worded and also contradictory. With many development plans out of date, NPPF has become the critical determining document in planning appeals.

Particularly in residential housing appeals, the system now relies on both the interpretation of words in the NPPF and also previous rulings by High Court judges as to what the words mean. In respect of development planning, plans now get limited scrutiny and the role of the court also becomes more important. In the short-term therefore, power over planning decisions has shifted to the centre, in marked contrast to the Westminster government’s support for localism and devolution.

The role of the court is creating, in Nathalie’s words “a straitjacket for decision-makers, which limits their ability to apply policy flexibly”.

How local authorities can regain the balance of power

She suggested however that it is worth remembering that in the Tesco case, the Supreme Court was careful to say that the issue related to the application of policy to a given set of facts, rather than interpretation of policy generally.

Planning authorities can therefore turn the ruling to their advantage by drafting planning policies in a hard-edged way. As policies need to be applied in a consistent and objective way, the clearer the development plan, the less room for appeal.


Morwen Johnson is Managing Editor of the Scottish Planning and Environmental Law Journal, which is published by Idox.

More information on the journal and how to subscribe can be found here.

The fall and rise of strategic planning

Image from Flickr user Sebastian Niedlich, licensed for reuse under a Creative Commons License

Image from Flickr user Sebastian Niedlich, licensed for reuse under a Creative Commons License

By Morwen Johnson

Throughout the history of planning there has been a continuing morphing of ideas and practices – reflecting changing circumstances, fashions and understandings about the role of planning in a modern society. Now it seems that recent economic and investment constraints are leading to a rise in interest in strategic planning again within the UK.

Professor Greg Lloyd, in a recent piece in our journal Scottish Planning and Environmental Law, suggests that this builds on the experiences of land-use planning (a British notion) and spatial planning – drawing on an emergent tradition in European terms. It seems obvious that the challenges of economic growth, housing need and environmental improvement do not respect the arbitrary boundaries of local authorities, or the short-term lifecycles of our political systems. And yet the effective implementation of strategic planning practice remains elusive.

A recent RTPI policy paper advocated a strengthening of strategic planning to secure greater co-operation with respect to development and to facilitate city regions. This comes as local authorities are now required, under the Localism Act, to co-operate and take a lead on addressing issues that cross boundaries and impact on the ‘larger than local’ area.

Professor Lloyd points out that within Scotland, the emphasis on strategic planning has been more consistent over time, and formed the backbone of governance for land use and development within Scottish planning practice. Within the London context of course, the Mayor is responsible for London’s planning at a strategic level, as set out in the London Plan. And Janice Morphet, in a recent article, argued that planning is “fundamentally concerned with delivery, based on social economic and environmental principles” and the current shift in scale towards combined authorities and neighbourhoods may “herald a bright future” for strategic spatial planning.

Contemporary strategic planning is therefore under the spotlight as a delivery solution to complex problems. The RTPI suggests that done well, strategic planning offers an efficient process for responsive, deliberative, collaborative and accountable decision-making. However this requires the planning profession to demonstrate skills of analysis, interpretation, risk assessment and visioning of place, as well as community engagement and facilitation skills. It also raises potential conflict in terms of planner’s roles as employees working in the public interest, as opposed to advocates for communities.

Inevitably strategic planning requires trade-offs between different interests and stakeholders. But successfully negotiating these diverse interests is not something that happens by chance. And the planning profession needs to recognise the key role they play in mitigating these tensions. If we are to have planning systems which support quality placemaking and long-term sustainability (as well as economic growth), then process cannot be an end in itself. Planners should take this opportunity to provide leadership, and enable dialogue on strategic planning, at local, sub-regional and national level.


Further reading

New lexicons of planning. Greg Lloyd, Scottish Planning and Environmental Law, No 168 Apr (2015)

Strategic planning: a bright future ahead. Janice Morphet, Town and Country Planning, Vol 84 No 4 (2015)

Strategic planning: effective co-operation for planning across boundaries. Royal Town Planning Institute (2015)

The demise of strategic planning? The impact of the abolition of Regional Spatial Strategy in a growth region. Martin Boddy and Hannah Hickman, Town Planning Review, Vol 84 No 6 (2013)

If you are interested in research, opinion and comment on planning, we have launched a special subscription offer to the Idox Information Service for RTPI Members.