Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 31 May 2012
31 May 2012 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Land Registration etc (Scotland) Bill
I, too, want to put on record my thanks to the committee clerks, our adviser Professor Kenneth Reid, SPICe, all the other officials who gave us advice and all those who responded to the consultation.
Unlike John Park and Stuart McMillan, I found the bill quite dry and complex. Perhaps they need to get out more if they found it exciting. Nonetheless, it is a good bill as far as it goes. It will streamline our processes and allow for mistakes to be corrected. Mike MacKenzie’s amendment will allow the Lands Tribunal for Scotland to adjudicate where there are concerns about mistakes that may have been made. Therefore, although it lacks policy, it will put in place some very good administrative practice.
There are issues missing from the bill that could have been addressed. One of those is the issue of prescriptive claims, when unscrupulous people acquire land—ransom strips—and hold back development. The aim of having a prescriptive claim in legislation is to do the opposite of that, but we need to look at the process again to ensure that it meets the public interest. The bill is a missed opportunity to rectify that problem. Patrick Harvie was right when he said that many aspects of the bill do not address the public interest.
Another issue that is missing from the bill is beneficial ownership. I tried to do something about that earlier with my amendment, which would have allowed those who had real concerns about the ownership of land that they were interested in to have that beneficial ownership registered. That would have created transparency when there were problems. I am disappointed that the amendment was not supported. Organisations such as HMRC, as well as tenants, crofters and neighbours of unscrupulous landowners have been let down because that amendment was not agreed to.
Mike MacKenzie levelled the charge of idealism at me. If I were being idealistic, I would have moved a totally different amendment that would have made the whole process much more transparent and accessible. I did not—I moved an amendment that was a practical solution to a difficult problem. As Patrick Harvie said, the bill would benefit from a good dose of idealism—we have missed that opportunity.
The other issue that has not really been touched on is the need for the register to be open and available to members of the public. People need to be able to access the register without any great cost. Information about who owns land in Scotland needs to be open and transparent. I hope that the minister will keep an eye on that issue to ensure that that is the case in the future.
Many of the contributors talked about completion of the register, as is right and proper, because that is one of the main aims of the bill. The statement was made that keeper-induced registration will not be compulsory. That raises concerns. How will we get a transfer to the new register if much of the land in Scotland remains unregistered? A lot of the land may pass into new ownership, but because that land ownership is in a trust, it is the ownership of the trust that changes, not the ownership of the land itself.
There may be an inducement in the bill—if not in the bill itself, certainly in the policy behind the bill—to encourage large landowners to register their land, especially if the land title is complex, because the minister suggested to the committee that there may be a change to how fees for land registration are charged. It may become much more expensive to register complex land titles in the future. Owners of large and complex estates might do well to consider that and get in early with their registration.
Mike MacKenzie talked about quality being sacrificed for speed—he is right. There were complaints about inaccuracies in the register and concerns about errors that were made by the keeper. The bill allows for those errors to be rectified, but we need to be careful. Land registration is extremely important. If it goes wrong it leads to disputes that can be expensive and difficult to put right. I hope therefore that accuracy will be given a high priority.
Section 108 was mentioned by Murdo Fraser, John Wilson, John Park and Annabel Goldie. There is a real concern that in trying to ensure that the transfer of land and land purchase is not open to fraud, solicitors may end up being prosecuted for fraud when they acted in good faith on the information that they had. We need to look at the guidance that goes with that part of the bill, because even an investigation can cause huge problems. A solicitor acts on the basis of their good character and people trust them because of that good character. If there is any question about their reputation it could damage their business, so I urge the minister to look at that guidance closely and to make sure that that damage cannot happen.
As I said earlier, I am pleased that the Lands Tribunal is being used to settle disputes. Mike MacKenzie pushed that in the committee and lodged amendments on the issue, and I congratulate him on getting his proposal accepted. Accessing the Lands Tribunal does not mean that people do not need lawyers, but it should mean that the process will be much simpler.
I thought that I would struggle to fill the seven minutes that you generously gave me, Presiding Officer, but I see that I am getting close to the end of that time.
This is a good and useful bill, but it is a missed opportunity to make good progress on the land reform agenda that the Government says that it supports.
11:30
Unlike John Park and Stuart McMillan, I found the bill quite dry and complex. Perhaps they need to get out more if they found it exciting. Nonetheless, it is a good bill as far as it goes. It will streamline our processes and allow for mistakes to be corrected. Mike MacKenzie’s amendment will allow the Lands Tribunal for Scotland to adjudicate where there are concerns about mistakes that may have been made. Therefore, although it lacks policy, it will put in place some very good administrative practice.
There are issues missing from the bill that could have been addressed. One of those is the issue of prescriptive claims, when unscrupulous people acquire land—ransom strips—and hold back development. The aim of having a prescriptive claim in legislation is to do the opposite of that, but we need to look at the process again to ensure that it meets the public interest. The bill is a missed opportunity to rectify that problem. Patrick Harvie was right when he said that many aspects of the bill do not address the public interest.
Another issue that is missing from the bill is beneficial ownership. I tried to do something about that earlier with my amendment, which would have allowed those who had real concerns about the ownership of land that they were interested in to have that beneficial ownership registered. That would have created transparency when there were problems. I am disappointed that the amendment was not supported. Organisations such as HMRC, as well as tenants, crofters and neighbours of unscrupulous landowners have been let down because that amendment was not agreed to.
Mike MacKenzie levelled the charge of idealism at me. If I were being idealistic, I would have moved a totally different amendment that would have made the whole process much more transparent and accessible. I did not—I moved an amendment that was a practical solution to a difficult problem. As Patrick Harvie said, the bill would benefit from a good dose of idealism—we have missed that opportunity.
The other issue that has not really been touched on is the need for the register to be open and available to members of the public. People need to be able to access the register without any great cost. Information about who owns land in Scotland needs to be open and transparent. I hope that the minister will keep an eye on that issue to ensure that that is the case in the future.
Many of the contributors talked about completion of the register, as is right and proper, because that is one of the main aims of the bill. The statement was made that keeper-induced registration will not be compulsory. That raises concerns. How will we get a transfer to the new register if much of the land in Scotland remains unregistered? A lot of the land may pass into new ownership, but because that land ownership is in a trust, it is the ownership of the trust that changes, not the ownership of the land itself.
There may be an inducement in the bill—if not in the bill itself, certainly in the policy behind the bill—to encourage large landowners to register their land, especially if the land title is complex, because the minister suggested to the committee that there may be a change to how fees for land registration are charged. It may become much more expensive to register complex land titles in the future. Owners of large and complex estates might do well to consider that and get in early with their registration.
Mike MacKenzie talked about quality being sacrificed for speed—he is right. There were complaints about inaccuracies in the register and concerns about errors that were made by the keeper. The bill allows for those errors to be rectified, but we need to be careful. Land registration is extremely important. If it goes wrong it leads to disputes that can be expensive and difficult to put right. I hope therefore that accuracy will be given a high priority.
Section 108 was mentioned by Murdo Fraser, John Wilson, John Park and Annabel Goldie. There is a real concern that in trying to ensure that the transfer of land and land purchase is not open to fraud, solicitors may end up being prosecuted for fraud when they acted in good faith on the information that they had. We need to look at the guidance that goes with that part of the bill, because even an investigation can cause huge problems. A solicitor acts on the basis of their good character and people trust them because of that good character. If there is any question about their reputation it could damage their business, so I urge the minister to look at that guidance closely and to make sure that that damage cannot happen.
As I said earlier, I am pleased that the Lands Tribunal is being used to settle disputes. Mike MacKenzie pushed that in the committee and lodged amendments on the issue, and I congratulate him on getting his proposal accepted. Accessing the Lands Tribunal does not mean that people do not need lawyers, but it should mean that the process will be much simpler.
I thought that I would struggle to fill the seven minutes that you generously gave me, Presiding Officer, but I see that I am getting close to the end of that time.
This is a good and useful bill, but it is a missed opportunity to make good progress on the land reform agenda that the Government says that it supports.
11:30
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (John Scott)
Con
The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-03070, in the name of Fergus Ewing, on the Land Registration etc (Scotland) Bill.As the bill contains pro...
The Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Employment and Sustainable Growth (John Swinney)
SNP
For the purposes of rule 9.11 of the standing orders, I advise Parliament that Her Majesty, having been informed of the purport of the Land Registration etc ...
The Deputy Presiding Officer
Con
Thank you. We now move to the debate. I call Fergus Ewing to speak to and move the motion. You have a generous 10 minutes, minister.10:25
The Minister for Energy, Enterprise and Tourism (Fergus Ewing)
SNP
Thank you for your generosity, Presiding Officer.I am pleased to open the stage 3 debate on the Land Registration etc (Scotland) Bill. First, I thank the mem...
Murdo Fraser
Con
I may have beaten Mr Harvie to asking the same question.The minister hopes that 80 per cent of properties will be registered by 2017. What proportion of the ...
Fergus Ewing
SNP
I suspected that members might be interested in the answer to that question, so I consulted officials about it yesterday evening. Most of the 700,000 propert...
Fergus Ewing
SNP
I do not know whether Mr Fraser and Mr Harvie have the same question to ask; it would be a parliamentary first. Let me not be accused of dodging any question...
Patrick Harvie
Green
My question is related. The minister is talking about moving from 55 per cent to 80 per cent of titles being covered but says that there is likely to be only...
Fergus Ewing
SNP
We have made it clear that the process cannot happen overnight and will take many years to complete. Mr Harvie is entitled to suggest alternative approaches....
Jenny Marra (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
Given that our system of conveyancing is based on mutual trust and professional obligation, what consideration was given to safeguards against criminal and f...
Fergus Ewing
SNP
The point of land registration legislation is to provide a state guarantee to title; the bill extends that protection. The protection of the public is also s...
Ken Macintosh (Eastwood) (Lab)
Lab
As I suspect all members will do today, I begin by welcoming the reforms in the Land Registration etc (Scotland) Bill and the improvements that we hope the b...
Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Con
I declare my interests as a member of the Law Society of Scotland and the convener of the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee, which was responsible for st...
John Wilson (Central Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
As deputy convener of the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee, I sat through a number of evidence-gathering sessions and read a number of the written submi...
John Park (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Lab
I echo the sentiments and words of John Wilson on the work that the committee clerks and other parliamentary staff did on the bill. The bill is technical in ...
Mike MacKenzie (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
SNP
I compliment my fellow members of the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee for their considered and intelligent scrutiny of the bill, and the clerks, who pr...
Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green)
Green
I echo the thanks that have been expressed to my fellow members of the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee, to our clerking team, to the officials who supp...
Mike MacKenzie
SNP
If a target such as the member describes was set, what mechanism could the Government use to ensure that it was achieved?
Patrick Harvie
Green
That goes back to the minister’s response to my earlier comments. He said that an alternative to the purely voluntary approach, which we know will not achiev...
Stuart McMillan (West Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
As one of the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee members who scrutinised the bill, I am happy that it will provide an improved framework and experience fo...
Annabel Goldie (West Scotland) (Con)
Con
As I mentioned at stage 1, I am now a retired solicitor, but when in practice I undertook conveyancing work over many years. As my colleague Murdo Fraser com...
Stuart McMillan
SNP
Does Annabel Goldie agree that it should not be about just the next five years, but that there should be continual scrutiny by future ministers to ensure tha...
Annabel Goldie
Con
Yes. My remarks were prompted by the minister’s specific comments about 2017 in the debate. The critical period of five years is significant.I share the conc...
Rhoda Grant (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Lab
I, too, want to put on record my thanks to the committee clerks, our adviser Professor Kenneth Reid, SPICe, all the other officials who gave us advice and al...
Fergus Ewing
SNP
This has been a useful and constructive debate. I thank all members for their contributions. The debate has demonstrated that members agree that this is an i...
John Wilson
SNP
Will the minister give way?
Fergus Ewing
SNP
The member will have to excuse me, but I really want to give the chamber some more information that I did not have time to give earlier.I understand from Reg...
The Presiding Officer (Tricia Marwick)
NPA
You have 20 seconds, Mr Ewing.
Fergus Ewing
SNP
In all seriousness, we believe that the offence provision in the bill is necessary. As the overwhelming majority of solicitors are honest, they will be neith...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
Minister, two weeks ago, you cast aspersions on my virtues when we were together in New York; now here you are, referring to Miss Goldie in such terms. One o...