Hansard

Land ownership has been contentious for centuries, but Scottish policy on land is now increasingly rooted in questions of fairness, equality and human rights.

I am proud of the actions that this Government has taken to remedy some inequities relating to land ownership, building on the work of previous Administrations. From the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2016, which empowered more communities to own and have a say about land, to the Scottish land rights and responsibilities statement—the first of its kind in the world—and the Scottish land fund, important steps have been taken towards ending the hegemony of the landed gentry in Scotland.

Nevertheless, Scotland still has the most concentrated pattern of private land ownership in Europe. It is estimated that half of Scotland’s privately owned land is in the ownership of just 400 individuals.

Just as the isle of Arran, in my constituency, is often described as “Scotland in miniature” because of its landscapes, the island’s land ownership pattern is illustrative of a wider issue. By 2015, Brodick beach had all but disappeared, as a consequence of the rapid erosion precipitated by the practice of extracting sand for export, years earlier. Erosion also threatens the village green in Lamlash.

Both areas are important, not only for the thousands of people who visit Arran each year but for local residents, who rely on those outdoor spaces for a variety of community events and activities. However, the future of such spaces lay at the mercy of Arran Estates, the land management company that is controlled by the Fforde family, which has owned large swathes of the island for more than six centuries, since a fruitful marriage in the 15th century.

North Ayrshire Council received criticism for—supposedly—permitting the erosion of Brodick beach and the village green in Lamlash, but the council’s reluctance to spend six-figure sums of public money on land that was in the Ffordes’s private ownership was understandable. The family then gifted some of the most eroded areas to North Ayrshire Council, thereby wiping out its liability to deal with the erosion, which is now the taxpayer’s responsibility.

North Ayrshire Council has to lease more than 50,000 square metres of land from Arran Estates, at a cost of tens of thousands of pounds each year, to access the semi-industrial area to the south of Brodick and areas of Brodick, Lamlash and the foreshore in Whiting Bay.

The situation encapsulates the environmental, economic and social detriment that concentrated land ownership can have on our communities.

Yesterday saw publication of the most substantial piece of research into the impact of large-scale and concentrated land ownership in Scotland. “Investigation into the Issues Associated with Large scale and Concentrated Landownership in Scotland” throws up many issues for this Parliament and the Scottish ministers to examine, discuss and, I hope, remedy. Previous reports focused on relatively small, in-depth case studies, but for this report the Scottish Land Commission, which this Government set up in 2016, heard from 407 stakeholders, who ranged from landowners and managers to tenants and community representatives.

The evidence that the commission gathered showed that most of the disadvantages associated with Scotland’s current pattern of land ownership relate to the concentration of social, economic and decision-making power, and not simply to the size or scale of landholdings.

The concentrated land ownership that we have can impede economic development. The Land Commission found that that is causing significant and long-term harm to impacted communities. For example, rural economic development relies on businesses’ and housing providers’ ability to access land for expansion and their confidence to invest. If ownership is too concentrated, a few landowners can control the position and the economic health of the area lies in their hands.

As the commission described in its report,

“the anti-development stance of some landowners”

might be

“motivated by a desire to preserve land as a ‘playground for very wealthy people’, with one respondent claiming that ‘the people who live here play second fiddle to whatever is best for the pheasant.’”

Island communities are particularly vulnerable in that regard. The book “Dr Green of Sussex and the Island of Raasay” tells the story of how an absentee landowner in the 1970s refused to allow construction of a pier. That caused huge damage to the island’s fragile community. A £12 million pier was eventually built by this Government.

It is unfortunate that, as a number of submissions to the commission stated, there is little or no redress for communities or individuals who suffer adverse economic or social impacts arising from land being owned by a single individual or organisation, and the opportunity for communities to participate in decisions relating to the use of land is severely limited.

In the light of the negative effects of concentrated land ownership, the commission made recommendations, which were directly informed by the evidence that it had heard, to redress adverse impacts and stimulate a more diverse pattern of land ownership.

For example, the commission recommended that the Scottish Government introduce a public interest test for significant land transfers and acquisitions. Such an approach is used in other countries, including South Africa, and would protect the public interest and limit the negative impact on local economies and communities. Of course, the criteria for triggering a public interest test would need careful consideration, but the recommendation should certainly be considered.

The commission also recommended that all substantial landholdings publish a management plan. That is a realistic and reasonable suggestion, which would require landowners to demonstrate how their management delivers on the land rights and responsibilities statement and connects with local priorities, opportunities and public policy. The approach would improve transparency and encourage greater community collaboration, mitigating risks that are associated with concentration of ownership.

It is imperative that this Parliament considers how we foster a more diverse and dynamic pattern of private and community ownership. The report puts to bed the question whether ownership is an issue and provides us with the evidence base to enable us to understand the issues that concentrated land ownership creates, and how they can be addressed.

The monopoly of land ownership in Scotland intersects a variety of legislative and policy areas, and I am pleased that the Scottish Government will work closely with the Scottish Land Commission to consider its recommendations. I do not doubt that the recommended reforms would benefit local communities, by increasing transparency and repairing harm that has been inflicted over many generations, to many people and many communities.