Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 28 March 2012

28 Mar 2012 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament

Item of business

Agricultural Holdings (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Lamont, John Con Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire Watch on SPTV

That was very helpful, but it does not necessarily mean that I have to agree with that view. I agree with the cabinet secretary’s view that there could be unintended consequences. We must think very carefully before further reforming the definition.

I raised in committee the issue of the bill’s impact on the ability of landowners and prospective tenants to freely negotiate their tenancy agreements, and the impact that that has on new entrants. There is a view that the freedom to contract is being undermined. That is having an impact on the supply of land, which in turn has an impact on new entrants’ ability to come into farming.

Tenant farmers and landowners have told me that, because they are unable to negotiate freely, they are entering into short-term arrangements rather than secure tenancies. As a consequence, tenant farmers are not prepared to invest in the land and the farm steadings in the way that they would have done if they had the benefit of a more secure tenancy.

Given the drop in the number of tenancies, which we have heard about already, we should be concerned that, by further interfering with the parties’ contractual freedom, we could be indirectly undermining the parties’ ability to enter into arrangements as they wish to. I know that that is not the Government’s intention, but we must keep the unintended consequences of such changes in mind when we consider further reform.

In the brief time that is available to me, I will focus on the lack of data. In January, the Government released figures that showed a 10 per cent drop in the number of holdings with tenancy agreements between 2005 and 2011. However, it became apparent during the committee’s scrutiny of the bill that there is an issue around the lack of accurate data in a number of areas, including rented land, which makes it much more difficult to understand fully the extent of the implications of the bill or of any possible future reform.

The briefing note from Scottish Land & Estates states that there is scepticism about those numbers, which show only a snapshot of the issue and fail to take into account that there are a number of destinations for the land once the tenancy comes to an end. Some of the land is bought back by the tenant, some is taken back to be farmed by the landowner and some is split to support existing businesses and current tenants. I agree with the committee report that the Scottish Government must, as a matter of urgency, work with the relevant parties to ensure that more accurate data is collected.

The fundamental issue is that we must get the balance right between the rights of the tenant and those of the landlord. The relationship between the two parties must be based on mutual respect and confidence in the other party, rather than leave those involved fearful of letting their land or unwilling to invest in their tenanted property.

The bill will make progress in the right direction, and we are happy to support it, but we must be careful about further reform.

15:05

Search Hansard contributions

Meeting of the Parliament 28 March 2012

In the same item of business