Meeting of the Parliament 28 October 2025 [Draft]
I will wind up quickly. With regard to the public interest test, the aims that are highlighted in amendment 129 are the things that we desperately need for our communities to thrive. Their absence is what leads to depopulation. It is not surprising if a landowner does not understand their importance, but they are a group of things that underpin the need for land reform. They are the things that community landowners do as a matter of course, and we see the difference that that makes with repopulation and economic development.
On Mercedes Villalba’s amendments 76 and 76A, NatureScot is rightly looking at who will buy Kinloch castle on Rum and it is putting in place checks and balances to ensure that the right buyer is found. That is because of its pivotal role in that community. The situation is the same for all large landowners. If NatureScot can do it, I do not see why we cannot impose the same restriction on all landowners.
Just for clarification, with regard to the 500 hectares, it is correct that similar amendments were lodged at stage 2. Those were discussed and, indeed, widely consulted on by Mercedes Villalba when she sought to introduce her own legislation on the issue. Therefore, it is not true to say that the amendments were not consulted on.
I press amendment 115.