Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 14 March 2012

14 Mar 2012 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament

Item of business

Land Registration etc (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Goldie, Annabel Con West Scotland Watch on SPTV

It is difficult in an essentially technical debate to introduce ideas and concepts without risking repetition. I prefer to comment briefly on one or two points and leave the minister with more time to respond to the debate. That is not a cop-out on my part, because I was struck during the debate by a number of points that attracted attention from members on all sides of the chamber, not least the issue of voluntary registration and how we make people register, which is key to the bill’s success.

I am pretty relaxed about targets. The much-vaunted target for tourism, for example, was set with the best of intentions, and now everyone keeps hanging their argument on it. The lesson to be learned is that, if the bill changes things for the better, we should assess the practical consequences of its implementation and consider whether adjustment or change is necessary.

I was struck by some of the contributions on inducing greater voluntary registration. Hanzala Malik made an interesting point about large landowners such as the MOD. The MOD may well be amenable to an approach, and other larger landowners may take the same view. I noted that James Kelly and Paul Wheelhouse share my view that the charging mechanism could be the key, and I would like to hear the minister’s comments on that.

On the accuracy of the land register, members such as Paul Wheelhouse made some good points about the genuine practical problems, particularly for remoter rural areas. Rob Gibson made an interesting point, but I am not quite sure whether I understood him completely. He seemed to be focusing on the OS map as the problem, and arguing that we should make that better. My concern is that, at present, I do not think that we can make an OS-based system better at dealing with issues relating to plots in rural areas on an appropriate scale. One line on an OS map may be a difference of several metres on the ground, which could be critical for the accuracy of title conferment and title interpretation. I go back to the point that we must ensure that the keeper is armed with all the ancillary information that she can get. There is a huge obligation on the registration applicant’s solicitor to provide as much information as possible. That may include professionally drawn surveyor’s plans and—as Mike MacKenzie indicated—information that is held in the old sasines system.

Surely whatever informs the keeper about how to register a title is worth while only if it is given some type of legal status in the archive. Otherwise, where is the keeper to go when there is a subsequent registration application? I would like the minister to comment on that.

It was no surprise to hear that a number of members on all sides of the chamber have profound concerns about section 108. Obviously, members of the minister’s own party were a little more circumspect in their observations, while others, such as myself, were a little blunter, but I would like to hear the minister’s further comments in that regard.

14:48

Search Hansard contributions

Meeting of the Parliament 14 March 2012

In the same item of business