Hansard

Scottish Labour will support the Crofting (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill at stage 1.

To be honest, I am one of those people who did not know a great deal about crofting before the bill’s introduction, unlike, I am glad to say, many of the committee’s members. I have since discovered that there are about 17,700 crofts in Scotland, mainly in the Highlands and Islands, and that around 33,000 people live in crofting households.

The Scottish Government website reminds us:

“Crofting plays a vital role in maintaining the population in remote rural areas, it provides a secure base for the development of small businesses and maintains and supports a range of unique habitats.”

In 2010, the Scottish Government issued a press release that stated:

“The Scottish Parliament has passed the Government’s Crofting Reform (Scotland) Bill which aims to tackle absenteeism, neglect and speculation and protect crofting for future generations.”

I found that an interesting quote.

Our committee is optimistic, in spite of the complexities involved, that the bill, if passed, will rectify the problem that is faced by those who have been affected by the flaw in the Crofting Reform (Scotland) Act 2010 in relation to owner-occupier crofters and the decrofting of land.

I add my voice to the comments that have already been made about the bill by our convener, Rob Gibson, and by the minister. It is important that the bill goes through an expedited process in order to end the state of limbo that has been imposed. The minister highlighted many of the reasons why that is very important for the people who are affected. However, that means that the challenge for the committee in analysing a complex range of legal views in evidence on potential amendments to the bill will be time-truncated. It was helpful for the minister to have outlined a response to our report already. I thank him for that—I am sure that the pressure is on the minister, too.

I will highlight two of the committee’s recommendations, which, together, indicate the committee’s agreed position clearly and inform the Parliament where we think we are in the determination to get things right in relation to what happens next—especially in view of Rob Gibson’s remarks about thickets and brambles.

The stage 1 report states:

“The Committee notes the criticism of the drafting of the Bill, particularly by those who will be left to interpret and advise on the law. The Committee is not expert in the legal detail and potential inconsistencies within crofting law and it is therefore difficult for the Committee to give a definitive view at this stage on the validity of some of the concerns raised.”

I identify myself strongly with that paragraph of our recommendations.

The report continues:

“It is clear to the Committee that there are concerns which require to be considered. The Committee strongly recommends that the Scottish Government give appropriate consideration to the evidence submitted to the Committee with a view to determining whether any of the issues raised require to be addressed by amending the Bill at Stage 2”

or stage 3.

As the minister acknowledged, there are specific concerns about the drafting of section 1 in relation to the definition of “decrofting direction”. Our committee recommends

“that the Scottish Government gives careful consideration to these specific issues ahead of Stage 2.”

I appreciate the challenges that that involves, but I would hope that it is possible.

As the Aquaculture and Fisheries (Scotland) Bill progressed, there was a lack of opportunity for robust parliamentary scrutiny of evidence from stakeholders on Scottish Government amendments at stage 3. That put Scottish Labour and some other parties in the somewhat difficult position of feeling obliged to abstain on those amendments at stage 3. That was in spite of there being agreement in principle with the amendments.

Scottish Labour is clear that, in the case of the Crofting (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill, it is even more vital for the Scottish Government amendments to be available for consideration at stage 2 if possible. I appreciate that there are pressures of time on the minister, but it would be extremely helpful.

The issue of retrospection has been raised by both the minister and our convener. As a clear-cut group of people have been affected since the current provisions came into force in October 2011, it is very important that they are allowed to decroft, just as owner-occupier crofters must be in the future.

The committee calls for swift processing of the 44 cases that have been put on hold and of any that are not put into the system by the Crofting Commission, if the bill becomes an act. The minister has committed to that today, which is very helpful.

I will make some remarks about the future. That is perhaps presumptuous, as I am an outsider to the crofting counties and a newcomer to the complexities of crofting law, but as an MSP who, along with other members from throughout the chamber, is committed to ensuring a vibrant future for crofting, I hope that the perceptions of an outsider—albeit a rural dweller—might be of some use.

From my experience, living in South Scotland and supporting my constituents in facing their challenges, I am keenly aware of the difficulties that rural dwelling can bring and of the isolation that can come with it. That includes difficulties with access to work, services, education and leisure.



The Scottish Government’s website tells us:

“Crofters may benefit from conventional agricultural and environmental schemes and from EC funded programmes. The Scottish Government provides specific support to crofting counties worth around ... £7 million”

a year through schemes such as the crofting cattle improvement scheme. The website says that that scheme

“is open to groups of at least 2 crofters ... and provides good quality, high health bulls in areas where it is impractical to keep bulls and over winter them and where no alternative hiring facility exists.”

Scottish Labour is clear that it is right for a range of support to be specifically targeted at groups of crofters and, indeed, individual crofters.

There are enough challenges for crofters without their being unnecessarily pressurised by the complexities of crofting law. That can occur when legal changes need to be made, for example so that people can build another house for the next generation, develop small-scale renewable energy facilities or diversify in some other way. There is an obligation on members across the chamber to grapple with how best to proceed.

If we look at decrofting alone, we will see that there are other issues of significance that will not be dealt with in the bill. As we said in our report, the committee believes that that is right in view of the lack of time for consultation, among other things. It is important that there is an opportunity for consultation on issues, foremost among which are

“The definition of what legally constitutes an owner-occupier crofter, and issues facing multiple owners of distinct parts of the same croft”.

The minister’s agreement to the committee’s recommendations that

“the Scottish Government reviews all of the issues raised with the Committee”

and

“the Scottish Government identifies a clear timeframe for the review and provides the Committee with progress updates on this work once it is underway”—

the convener of the committee, Rob Gibson, highlighted that issue—

is welcome.

The committee’s discussion about how best to move forward on the complexities and the opaque and—to use the minister’s word—sometimes “impenetrable” nature of crofting law more generally led to our comment that

“Consolidation would place all of the law in one place, to make it easier to access, but not necessarily to understand. What may also require consideration is codification of the law, i.e. restating the policy in revised, simplified, terms.”

We discussed that in the committee. It is a major challenge for all of us in the Parliament, particularly those of us who have not yet experienced the complexities of crofting law but perhaps also for those who have. We owe it to the future of the crofting communities to meet that challenge.

The committee of inquiry on crofting reported in 2008, and the Scottish Government set out five key principles that are central to securing the future of crofting. Those were:

“Maintaining and increasing the amount of land held in crofting tenure”;

“Ensuring that land in crofting tenure is put to productive use”;

“Ensuring that housing in the crofting counties makes a full contribution to the local economy”;

“Giving more power to local people to determine their own futures”;

and

“Assisting young people and new entrants into crofting.”

Ensuring that crofting law is better law will help to progress many of those principles more easily, although there are many other ways in which they can be progressed. We must rise to the challenge as parliamentarians.