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 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 4 July 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 5973 contributions

|

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 24 June 2025

Edward Mountain

The result of the division is: For 5, Against 2, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 298 agreed to.

Amendment 536 moved—[Emma Harper].

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 24 June 2025

Edward Mountain

Everyone was very quiet there. I have obviously lulled members into a false sense of security.

Amendments 269 and 270 moved—[Mairi Gougeon]—and agreed to.

Amendment 544 moved—[Tim Eagle].

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 24 June 2025

Edward Mountain

The result of the division is: For 2, Against 5, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 544 disagreed to.

Amendments 271 to 273 moved—[Mairi Gougeon]—and agreed to.

Amendment 535 moved—[Tim Eagle].

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 24 June 2025

Edward Mountain

I do not know, Mr Eagle. Maybe it is all down to my intervention; perhaps that confused you.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 24 June 2025

Edward Mountain

The result of the division is: For 5, Against 2, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 276 agreed to.

Amendments 277 to 279 moved—[Mairi Gougeon].

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 24 June 2025

Edward Mountain

Does any member object to a single question being put on amendments 277 to 279?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 24 June 2025

Edward Mountain

I do, too, so two of us object. Therefore, we will vote on each amendment in turn.

The question is, that amendment 277 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members: No.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 24 June 2025

Edward Mountain

The question is, that amendment 278 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members: No.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 24 June 2025

Edward Mountain

The result of the division is: For 5, Against 2, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 307 agreed to.

Amendment 308 moved—[Mairi Gougeon].

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 24 June 2025

Edward Mountain

As no other member wishes to speak, I will say a few words, if I may. I find this really difficult because, during the evidence session, we heard that there has been a definite slowdown in the tenanted farming sector as a result of previous changes to legislation under which contracts had been entered into and agreed by both parties. I believe that we need a thriving and stable tenanted sector for Scotland’s rural economy to survive; we do not need to see it reducing in size. Amending provisions that were agreed in the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 1991 and the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 2003 will just exaggerate the problem of the decline in the tenanted sector. I also take the view that if the tenant farming commissioner or his predecessor—both of whom I have huge respect for and have worked with during their time in office—have made a recommendation, it is dangerous to go against them, given that their view is probably based on experience.

In my experience, resumption of parts of farmland either for the landlord or to give bits up—as I have done myself—usually involves a conversation around the kitchen table and is done amicably until an agreement is thrashed out. My problem with the amendments that are being made to both the 1991 act and the 2003 act is that they make the situation open-ended. I totally agree that the multipliers of one times the rent for disturbance and four times the rent for reorganization are completely overtaken by events, because costs have risen. That is why I tried to push for a multiplier of 15 in order to give a clear signal to both parties. If the rent on a bit of land was £1,000, a tenant in the old days would get just a £5,000 payment, whereas, under the system that I was proposing, they would get a £15,000 payment. That would be a significant uplift, which, to me, reflects the cost.

To be honest, I am also disappointed that, although I thought that one had been reached, we do not seem to have any agreement on this between tenants and landlords. The very fact that they have not agreed means that we are in a situation where neither side can work out what is best for the tenanted farming sector. What is clear is that where we are is not suitable and will cause a further reduction in tenanted farms. For that reason, I make it entirely clear that, until agreement is reached between the parties, I will vote against any amendment on this matter that I see before me at this stage, and I encourage members to vote against it, too.