Opposing interests line up on land reform plans
Differences, mainly between individuals and organisations, have been exposed in the responses to the Scottish Government's consultation on the next phase of its land reform programme, the analysis of which has just been published.
The consultation attracted 1,269 responses, 84% of them from individuals.
However, both supporters and opponents of reform expressed a concern that the vision and principles set out in the consultation required to be defined more clearly, and that the draft Land Rights and Responsibilities Policy set out in the paper appeared to present high level aspirations rather than a policy statement.
The proposed creation of a Scottish Land Reform Commission, with proposed responsibilities such as promoting land reform, collecting evidence and monitoring the impact of law, policies and practices, provided the first point of dispute. Whereas 75% of those expressing a view agreed that a SLRC would help ensure that Scotland continues to make progress on land reform, 68% of the 54 private landowner organisations who dealt with this point disagreed.
Similarly, 79% of responses on the question agreed with the proposed restriction on the type of legal entities that can take ownership or a long lease over land in Scotland – the paper proposed a restriction to individuals or EU legal entities – to improve the transparency and accountability of land ownership. Private landowner organisations and private sector and professional bodies were least supportive, citing potential loss of inward investment, likely exploitation of loopholes, and discouragement of a free market.
There was also resistance from nearly all landowner interests, and from a majority of professional bodies, to new powers for ministers where there is sufficient evidence that current ownership patterns are causing barriers to sustainable development, whereas 75% of individuals were in favour. Concerns centred round overcentralising of powers in government, which might be used for political purposes, and possible conflicts between local and national priorities and betwen different aspects of sustainability. Giving a more proactive land management role to public bodies such as the Forestry Commission also attracted opposing views, while gaining 79% overall support.
The majority (64%) of those addressing the issue agreed that the Scottish Government should take forward some of the recommendations of the Agricultural Holdings Legislation Review Group within the proposed Land Reform Bill. However, whilst 68% of individual respondents supported this proposal, 65% of organisations opposed it.
Removal of the exemption from business rates for shootings and deerstalking attracted predictable opposition from landowners, who countered claims of parity and fairness with arguments that it could lead to potential loss of local jobs, tourism and inward investment; reduced land maintenance with a rise in the deer population; and the possibility of local estates and related businesses failing.
There was broader support for better information on land, its value and ownership, including completion of the Land Register.
Minister for Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Dr Aileen McLeod commented: "The analysis shows most proposals received over 70% support, with respondents giving a wide range of helpful detail on their reasoning for support or opposition.
"The Scottish Government is committed to meaningful land reform and we have been carefully considering the responses to the consultation alongside other evidence to shape the development of the bill."