The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Displaying 1198 contributions
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 19 November 2024
Michael Matheson
Okay. That is very clear.
Sarah-Jane, I want to go back to your comment that you were surprised that the Scottish Government had—I think that I am paraphrasing—flipped the process and placed the obligation on the seller. Had it been considering that the process should be based on the purchaser?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 19 November 2024
Michael Matheson
Yes, we are getting into the weeds of how the system would operate, rather than considering the principle of whether there should be a transfer test or a public interest test. There would be greater transparency in being up front in saying that there will be a public interest test, rather than a transfer test, which is a bit non-specific.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 19 November 2024
Michael Matheson
Do you think that that was too high?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 19 November 2024
Michael Matheson
You would be open to the idea of a longer-term plan rather than a five-year plan.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 19 November 2024
Michael Matheson
My understanding of trying to manage land is that it is done over a long period of time. By its very nature, it is much more efficient and effective to do it that way. For example, forestry plans are for 15 or 20 years, and so on. Long-term plans therefore make more sense.
However, if you commit to the idea of long-term plans, consistency of approach is needed over a long period of time, which means that, if land changes hands or the land use changes, which changes the plan, that undermines the purpose of doing it over a longer period of time.
I hear the concerns about the cost that might be associated with that, which is why I am wondering whether making the plan for a longer period of time, while ensuring that the obligations that are set out in that plan are carried forward by anyone who takes over the land while the plan is being implemented, would help to improve land management in the long term and reduce some of the regulatory burden that it might create.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 19 November 2024
Michael Matheson
You might not want obligations, but some people might.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 19 November 2024
Michael Matheson
I think that you are confused about what I am trying to get at. Perhaps it is the way in which I have phrased it to you. When I use the term “obligation”, you seem to be thinking about it from a legal perspective—that is, being legally liable to ensure that something is implemented. What I am trying to understand is whether you are clear about what a land management plan is, what it is there to achieve, how much value it has in the long term, whether there is a requirement for the plan to be taken forward and, if it is not taken forward, what the implications of that are. After all, the danger is that, if we do not get the four or five criteria correct, it becomes a futile process.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 19 November 2024
Michael Matheson
So, if the detail that is set out in the land management plan is not an obligation, what is the purpose of it?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 19 November 2024
Michael Matheson
No, I do not think so. I am trying to understand why a landowner who has given a commitment in a land management plan should not be responsible for implementing the bits that they are responsible for, if there has not been a material change, such as a change in subsidy for farming.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee
Meeting date: 19 November 2024
Michael Matheson
Thanks.