Holyrood, made browsable

Hansard

Every contribution to the Official Report — chamber and committee — searchable in one place. Pulled from data.parliament.scot, indexed for full-text search, linked through to every MSP.

129
Current MSPs
415
MSPs ever elected
13
Parties on record
2,355,091
Hansard contributions
1999–2026
Coverage span
Official Report

Search Hansard contributions

Clear
Showing 0 of 2,355,091 contributions in session S6, 17 Apr 2026 – 17 May 2026. Latest 30 days: 148. Coverage: 12 May 1999 — 14 May 2026.

No contributions match those filters.

← Back to list
Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 16 December 2015

16 Dec 2015 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

I thank the fantastic team that supported the RACCE committee throughout its work and the many communities, members of the public and organisations who gave written and oral evidence, which helped us immeasurably in putting together our report.

The report is long, but this is a long and complex bill. It is also a crucial bill, which will have ramifications throughout Scotland. The bill aims to deliver a more equal country, tackle concentrated patterns of land ownership in Scotland, give communities a say in and influence over the use of the land on which they depend and provide for a fairer balance of power between landlords and tenants. Those are worthy aims and objectives and Scottish Labour supports them.

The bill follows on from the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 and the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015, and it draws on the work of the land reform review group and the agricultural holdings legislation review group.

However, there is so much more that we need to do to ensure that the bill is fit for purpose and delivers on the ambitions that we share. That is why I am deeply disappointed that we do not yet have the Scottish Government’s response to our stage 1 report. We had expected to have the report, and our not having it will impact on our capacity to draft amendments over the recess. I had assumed that today’s debate would give the Government a fantastic opportunity to tell Scottish National Party members how it intends to strengthen the bill in light of the revolt at the SNP conference in October.

Today, our job is at least to get to the headlines. The bill must be strengthened in relation to human rights. We need recognition of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the “Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security” to underpin the objectives of the bill—that needs to be in the bill. That will help to bolster the purpose of the bill and put it in the context of human rights in a way that we can debate and reflect on.

The land rights and responsibilities statement is an important start, but it needs to be subject to consultation and it needs to integrate with biodiversity and climate change issues and be consistent with the land use strategy and the national planning framework.

We particularly welcome the proposal that there be a Scottish land commission, but we highlight that the commissioners should have relevant skills and experience and not just a range of knowledge but a grounding in the equalities and empowerment challenges that are at the heart of the aspirations for the bill.

Information and knowledge about who owns and controls land will be crucial to whether the bill delivers. We need transparency and accountability, and that is why we need to know who the request authority will be. Ministers need to clarify that for us.

The land reform review group made an important recommendation when it suggested that restricting registration to EU-registered entities would deliver transparency of ownership and the capacity to ensure that any taxes that are due will be paid. However, that is not provided for in the bill. I do not think that ministers, under questioning, gave us convincing answers on the matter and we have certainly not had convincing answers in the chamber today about how the bill might change. I am sure that I am not the only member who has had dozens of emails this week from constituents who want the bill to provide that clarity. In framing our amendments over the next couple of weeks, we need to think about that in order to ensure that the bill does not fail the test of transparency.

The recommendations on page 54 of the committee’s report make it clear that we need clarity about ownership and who controls it and benefits from it, with a named person that communities can consult and a transparent and effective registration process. Those are the building blocks that we need to have in place. If ownership is clear and known, it will be so much easier for communities to be engaged in the crucial decisions relative to the land that they are interested in. I am talking not about every day-to-day decision, but about the really big decisions. The bill needs to make that clearer.

We need to learn the lessons from the 2003 act. The guidance from the Scottish Government will be crucial, because communities will not be able to read the bill. It took the committee 141 pages to come up with our conclusions, and the bill will be even more difficult for communities. We picked up on our visit to Fife that the bill needs to be made fit for purpose for communities and we need penalties for lack of engagement.

We strongly support the new principle in part 5 of a community right to buy land to further sustainable development. We hoped to see that in the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015, but we welcome its inclusion in this bill. “Sustainable development” is a well-used and well-established term and it has featured in several pieces of legislation since the Parliament was established. However, more detail could be put into the bill, particularly in relation to how ministers will judge “significant harm” and “significant benefit”.

We will need to clarify the land that is registered under the community empowerment legislation and under the land reform legislation and ensure that it is all brought together so that communities and landowners have clarity.

The committee has rightly asked for consideration of how we deliver good-quality land and buildings for housing. The land reform review group raised not just the idea of a compulsory purchase order but the possibility of a compulsory sale order where, for example, an empty building or vacant or derelict land could be used to deliver sustainable development but that is not being realised. I hope that ministers will consider such a provision and lodge amendments on it at stage 2. We are certainly considering the matter. Such a provision would definitely help to strengthen the bill. It would be helpful if the minister could work on that over the next couple of weeks. The idea is supported by Community Land Scotland and Shelter Scotland.

In the same item of business

The Presiding Officer (Tricia Marwick) NPA
The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-15181, in the name of Aileen McLeod, on the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill.
Sarah Boyack (Lothian) (Lab) Lab
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I return to the point of order that I made yesterday, which was to register the fact that, 23 hours before the debate...
The Presiding Officer NPA
I thank Sarah Boyack for advance notice of that point of order. As the member is aware, there is an agreed protocol between the Scottish Parliament and the...
The Minister for Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform (Aileen McLeod) SNP
I begin by expressing my gratitude to Rob Gibson and the other members of the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee for their scrutiny of a...
Alex Fergusson (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Con
I hear what the minister says, but would she accept that it sets us at a bit of a disadvantage when we have no clue as to the Government’s response to the st...
Aileen McLeod SNP
This is a debate on the committee’s stage 1 report, and I am keen to ensure that we give members across the chamber an opportunity to reflect their views, so...
Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Con
The minister will appreciate that we are being asked to vote this evening on the general principles of the bill, a bill that the committee report has exhaust...
Aileen McLeod SNP
That will be a matter for committee consideration at stage 2. Members: Oh!
Aileen McLeod SNP
But we will also be giving an indication. It is the committee’s stage 1 report that we are discussing. We started this process with a good bill, and I know ...
Sarah Boyack Lab
I ask the minister to read the sections of the committee’s report in which we discuss in great detail the fact that the committee is deeply unhappy about whe...
Aileen McLeod SNP
I accept Sarah Boyack’s point on the need to have an urgent review, and we will consider that carefully in our response to the committee’s report. I welcome...
Sarah Boyack Lab
Will the minister take an intervention?
Aileen McLeod SNP
I am just about to finish. We cannot roll back hundreds of years of history overnight and nor can we fix all problems in one easy step. However, we can and ...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (John Scott) Con
I call Rob Gibson to speak on behalf of the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee. 16:17
Rob Gibson (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) SNP
The Land Reform (Scotland) Bill has generated a huge debate across Scotland about the very land that we stand on. The RACCE Committee’s extensive programme o...
Liz Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Con
Rob Gibson said that access to information is important. Does the committee agree with the point that Sarah Boyack raised about just how late some informatio...
Rob Gibson SNP
With due respect, that has nothing to do with the issues in the report that I am talking about. We will see the Government’s response in due course, and Liz ...
Claudia Beamish (South Scotland) (Lab) Lab
Will the member take an intervention?
Rob Gibson SNP
Briefly.
Claudia Beamish Lab
I thank the member. Would he agree that, in view of SNH’s 2014 report on deer management, the issue is even more significant?
Rob Gibson SNP
The report showed a lack of progress, but deer counts by SNH have also been lacking. The bill must be amended in that regard. Provisions on agricultural hol...
The Deputy Presiding Officer Con
You must close, please.
Rob Gibson SNP
We cannot ignore the warning by Scottish Land & Estates of huge financial penalties should land reform laws interfere with entrenched property rights. Is...
The Deputy Presiding Officer Con
You must finish, please.
Rob Gibson SNP
Ms Shields put it succinctly when she said: “the question should not be ‘Is it legitimate to disturb property rights?’ but ‘Is it legitimate not to?’” 16:27
Sarah Boyack (Lothian) (Lab) Lab
I thank the fantastic team that supported the RACCE committee throughout its work and the many communities, members of the public and organisations who gave ...
Aileen McLeod SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Sarah Boyack Lab
If the minister can give me a good answer, I will be delighted to take an intervention.
Aileen McLeod SNP
I make the point to Sarah Boyack that work on compulsory sale orders is being taken forward through our housing and land reform team. It is part and parcel o...
Sarah Boyack Lab
That was a helpful intervention, minister. I hope that, in the light of that report, she will now come to the right conclusion. We would certainly be keen to...