Skip to main content
Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 18 September 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2121 contributions

|

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 November 2024

Bob Doris

So, a proactive approach would be helpful?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 November 2024

Bob Doris

David Bean, do you have any reflections on that, before we move on to my next question?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 November 2024

Bob Doris

I get that. Are there any other reflections? Sarah-Jane Laing, if Glasgow botanic gardens fitted into the required threshold 100 times, would that be reasonable? Is there a case for bringing the threshold below 3,000 hectares, given the comparison that I am drawing?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 November 2024

Bob Doris

That is interesting. I need to move on, so I apologise to Gemma Cooper for not bringing her in on that point. It is interesting to hear about the idea of having a backstop of 3,000 hectares, but perhaps with a lower threshold based on other criteria. That is really interesting for members as we scrutinise the bill.

On compliance, we heard that land management plans could be positive for landowners and communities—Sarah-Jane Laing made some positive comments about that. Land management statements might be happening already in some cases, and there are real opportunities there. However, there is a debate around having a high-level strategic document versus specific localised elements and requirements. There seems to be a slight tension in relation to some of that.

Whatever we end up with, if the penalty for not producing a land management plan is a maximum of £5,000 but it costs up to £20,000 every five years to produce one, would it be easier for people to just not produce one? Do we have to look again at the fines and compliance? Fining is a last resort, but is £5,000 just too low in that context?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 November 2024

Bob Doris

Would it be correct to say that that is your view, unless the landowner has not acted in good faith or made reasonable efforts to implement the terms that are in the land management plan?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 November 2024

Bob Doris

I appreciate that. Witnesses have been making a big deal of the fact that the cost could be £15,000 to £20,000 but, when I mention the maximum fine, suddenly, we find that it might not cost that much to produce a land management plan. That leaves MSPs a little bit confused, but thank you for that.

Gemma Cooper, do you have any thoughts on the £5,000 maximum fine?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 November 2024

Bob Doris

I have no further questions, convener.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 November 2024

Bob Doris

Thank you for those comments. It might sound as if I am pushing one specific compliance fine, but I refer back to Sarah-Jane Laing’s initial positive comments on the power of a land management plan, and I associate myself with the comments of Mr Bean.

The deputy convener talked about whether compliance should relate to the terms of the land management plan or just to the production of the plan. Sarah-Jane Laing talked about the fact that it would not be a statutory obligation to adhere to every aspect of a land management plan. If it can be proven—of course, it is about how you prove it—that the landowner has not acted in good faith to attempt to implement the provisions of a plan to the best of their ability, should that be a compliance issue?

11:00  

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 November 2024

Bob Doris

That is quite helpful. I do not want to misinterpret what you are saying. Rather than there being a statutory duty on the landowner to deliver everything in the land management plan, you seem to be saying that, if reasonable, good-faith efforts have not been made to deliver the contents of such a plan, that should be a compliance issue. Have I interpreted that correctly?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 November 2024

Bob Doris

I have a final question and will go to Gemma Cooper first. If you have any reflections on my previous question, please feel free to share them, Gemma.

Who reports compliance issues or breaches of the land management plan? The bill as it stands is relatively restrictive, in that only certain groups are able to do that. Of course, there is a balance to be struck between the obvious bodies that could report on a potential breach or lack of compliance versus what could be malicious reporting.

I will not come back in after this, convener.

Irrespective of who can or cannot report on compliance or on breaches, should the commissioner be able to undertake proactive work on a small scale in order to see what is happening with land management plans, so that we are not reliant on issues being reported?