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 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 supported the process, to our adviser and to all our witnesses.
Murdo Fraser reminded us that he was the only lawyer on the committee and that that gave him a perspective that, perhaps, a few of the rest of us found difficult to keep up with. He seems to have been on the receiving end of some rather cutting remarks about lawyers during recent committee meetings, so perhaps the rest of us should be grateful that we have been protected from those.
Whatever approach the Government took to the bill, there was bound to be a lot of technical content and a lot of expectation on members to deal with that. My regret, which I spoke about during the debate on Rhoda Grant’s amendment 1, is that the minister seems to regard this purely as a technical bill. Its weakness is in the policy content that is not there, rather than in what the Government has chosen to do.
Members may know that I drew most heavily on one witness in particular and I will cite him again. Andy Wightman’s written evidence to the committee pointed out that
“This is the first time in the history of Scotland that a democratically-elected Scottish Parliament has considered the statutory basis for sanctioning who owns land in Scotland and providing the benefits that accrue to landowners with a recorded title. It is therefore vital that Parliament consider some wider questions of public interest that come within the scope of the Bill.”
That is what has not been done and that is the opportunity that has been missed. It comes down to the purpose of the bill. In the policy documents that accompany the bill, its principal purpose is stated clearly:
“Completion of the Land Register”.
However, to listen to the minister’s remarks, both in committee and today in the chamber, it would seem that the bill’s purpose is purely transactional and that it is, in fact, just about facilitating sales, protecting landowners’ interests and promoting economic development.
Questions about the wider public interest and about what the public gain from having an effective and modern land registration system have been missed. A number of those aspects were addressed in stage 1 discussions and in stage 2 amendments, and it became clear that the Government had decided that it was determined not to budge on those issues.
I will address the idea of including a target date for completing the land register. If we believe the assertion that the bill’s principal policy objective is completing the land register, it is odd that the bill does not include a target date—even an indicative target date—as is set for a host of other policies, such as the eradication of fuel poverty. In many areas, we set a target date and give ministers a duty to act in the way that is best calculated to achieve the aim by that date.
Murdo Fraser reminded us that he was the only lawyer on the committee and that that gave him a perspective that, perhaps, a few of the rest of us found difficult to keep up with. He seems to have been on the receiving end of some rather cutting remarks about lawyers during recent committee meetings, so perhaps the rest of us should be grateful that we have been protected from those.
Whatever approach the Government took to the bill, there was bound to be a lot of technical content and a lot of expectation on members to deal with that. My regret, which I spoke about during the debate on Rhoda Grant’s amendment 1, is that the minister seems to regard this purely as a technical bill. Its weakness is in the policy content that is not there, rather than in what the Government has chosen to do.
Members may know that I drew most heavily on one witness in particular and I will cite him again. Andy Wightman’s written evidence to the committee pointed out that
“This is the first time in the history of Scotland that a democratically-elected Scottish Parliament has considered the statutory basis for sanctioning who owns land in Scotland and providing the benefits that accrue to landowners with a recorded title. It is therefore vital that Parliament consider some wider questions of public interest that come within the scope of the Bill.”
That is what has not been done and that is the opportunity that has been missed. It comes down to the purpose of the bill. In the policy documents that accompany the bill, its principal purpose is stated clearly:
“Completion of the Land Register”.
However, to listen to the minister’s remarks, both in committee and today in the chamber, it would seem that the bill’s purpose is purely transactional and that it is, in fact, just about facilitating sales, protecting landowners’ interests and promoting economic development.
Questions about the wider public interest and about what the public gain from having an effective and modern land registration system have been missed. A number of those aspects were addressed in stage 1 discussions and in stage 2 amendments, and it became clear that the Government had decided that it was determined not to budge on those issues.
I will address the idea of including a target date for completing the land register. If we believe the assertion that the bill’s principal policy objective is completing the land register, it is odd that the bill does not include a target date—even an indicative target date—as is set for a host of other policies, such as the eradication of fuel poverty. In many areas, we set a target date and give ministers a duty to act in the way that is best calculated to achieve the aim by that date.
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...