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

Ewing, Annabelle SNP Mid Scotland and Fife Watch on SPTV

Although I have the privilege of being the deputy convener of the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee, I speak not on behalf of the committee but as an individual MSP. As the convener said, however, there is considerable common ground in the committee on both the narrowly framed bill and the need to look at the wider issues concerning agricultural tenancy law in Scotland. I refer members to paragraph 80 of the report, which states:

“The Committee recommends that, following the completion of this Bill, the Scottish Government continue to work with the TFF and other stakeholders, landowners and tenants across Scotland, to review the operation of agricultural legislation and address the other challenges facing the tenant farming community in Scotland as soon as possible.”

In the short time that is available to me, I will focus on a matter on which some progress on the detail is already being made: succession—which we have already heard a bit about—and, specifically, persons who would have putative rights to a tenancy on the death of the tenant. Currently, although the tenant can assign the tenancy to a wider group of people, upon the tenant’s death it is only “near relatives” who will be afforded protection as successor tenants, in that they can serve a counter notice following a notice to quit being served by the landlord. As we have heard, the phrase “near relative” is narrowly defined and does not currently include grandchildren of the tenant, but the bill proposes to extend that protection to grandchildren of the tenant. In doing so, it acknowledges the consensus that was reached in the tenant farming forum, which is the industry body that was set up inter alia to consider improvements in the operation of agricultural tenancy law and practice.

As I said in my intervention on Mr Lamont, others also spoke in favour of there being a wider definition when they gave evidence to the committee, including the Scottish Tenant Farmers Association and the National Farmers Union Scotland. Although the committee had sympathy with those who support a wider definition, it felt nonetheless that, in accordance with the very delicate compromise that was achieved by the TFF, we should forge ahead with the approach as it stands.

It is a matter of some disappointment to me that matters cannot progress more quickly, but taking into account the hard work that has been done to get us where we are, on balance it is more important to respect the consensus and hope that it spurs people in the TFF on to more speedy work and the creation of more consensus on the broader issues that have been alluded to.

We have also heard about the important issue of lack of data. In order to inform our debate on the way forward, we must secure accurate and meaningful data. Otherwise, we will have a debate that is based on assertions and speculative figures, which would be no help to anybody.

On a conciliatory note, I believe that Scottish Land & Estates is to be commended for its change of heart during the committee process—which the cabinet secretary mentioned—on when the extended succession provisions should apply. The matter is not expected to affect too many people in practice but, nonetheless, Scottish Land & Estates showed willingness to compromise on the issue, so it should be given the credit that it is due. I hope that that signals a willingness to engage on the wider issues in the same spirit of consensus, because it is the wider issues to which we now need to turn.

I commend all the committee members for their hard work in producing a consensual report.

15:09

Search Hansard contributions

Meeting of the Parliament 28 March 2012

In the same item of business