Have your say on the Land Reform Bill

May 13, 2024 by Editor

*Deadline passed

The Scottish Government's continued commitment to land reform is welcomed but the new Land Reform Bill does not come close to to addressing the root causes of the inequality of land ownership - the domination of most of Scotland by just a few rich landowners. The Bill offers some useful tools but will not sort out Scotland's key land issues.

It's estimated that just 433 people own half of Scotland's land. Land is power and its ownership comes with huge resources and wasted potential. We hope that by filling in this consultation *in your own words* you will be encouraging the Government to be bolder.

We recommend, for your convenience, you focus on section 1

(*you can find the consultation link here and at the bottom of this page*)

*If you're keen we recommend for you to fill in SECTIONS 1-6 of the Bill unless you wish to do more*

Section 1

1) Do you agree that there is a need for further land reform to address issues around large landholdings in Scotland?

Yes. You should discuss your own reasons and support for land reform, your experience and thoughts on large landowners, the power imbalance, the sport shooting, your thoughts on what needs to change and why.

You can make clear that taxing land / large estates / large landowners could help to fix Scotland's land inequalities and raise hundreds of millions in funds.
You could mention REVIVE's commissioned paper on land taxes (linked here) which could achieve this.
You can discuss that the Government's definition of 'large land holdings' (3,000 hectares) is far too much. You may suggest it should be 500 hectares at the most.
Do you think there should be a cap on how much land any one person or business can own?
Any other thoughts you have about land reform and breaking up large estates - for people, wildlife and the environment
The killing to kill on grouse moors - hundreds of thousands of animals that die so more grouse can be shot for 'sport' - decided by the power of large landowners. Is this an issue you want to speak about?

2) Will the proposals in this Bill fulfil the Scottish Government’s objectives in relation to land reform?

No. You may wish to discuss that you think it doesn't do enough to change the power imbalance or break the centuries old land concentration in Scotland.

The Bill proposes community engagement and management plans for land over 3,000 hectares (the definition of 'large landholdings'). You may suggest this definition is far too high, suggest a lower amount like no more than 500 hectares.
Community engagement only works when there are still communities present - many places are desolate because of land ownership patterns - You could recommend the definition of 'Communities' should be extended to potential communities/organisations/local authorities/individuals from elsewhere in Scotland that may be interested in a say on the land.
Discuss policies you think would help make real land reform happen instead.
Without taxation of land it may be very hard to change behaviours and landownership patterns in a way that help the Government's objectives.
Landowners should be fined and/or have subsidies removed when they don't adhere to a strong code of land rights and responsibilities - providing expected biodiversity, wildlife and environmental protection

3) Do you support the proposal that the Scottish Ministers may, by regulations, impose obligations on landowners to promote community engagement in relation to large landholdings?

Yes. But you may wish to say the plans required should be strong, and the consequences for not doing it properly (like fines) should be harsh enough, that owning large amounts of land should become an impediment.

You may once again mention that the definition of 'large landholdings' is too high.

This could be one of the strongest proposals in the Bill, if done well. Management plans should be made publicly available and be accessible. What are you own expectations of landowners with people, nature and wildlife?

*You may want to speak out against monocultures and large sport shooting estates here.*

4) In principle, do you agree that owners of large landholdings should have a legal duty to consult on and publish land management plans?

Yes. This is the part of the Bill that deserves the most support. You may want to say it should be as strong as possible.

5) Do you support the process for investigating alleged breaches of community engagement requirements for large landowners set out in the Bill? Do you support the proposed level of penalty for contravention?

The fines should be much higher and you may suggest the expectations for community engagement should be very high. You could say they should be so high that it discourages owning so much land. When there isn't much of a community to engage with there should still be engagement with a local authority.

Section 2

6) Do you support in principle strengthening community bodies’ opportunity to buy large landholdings?

Yes.

If you answered “yes”, does Section 2 of the Bill go about this in the right way to address the Government’s aims?

No.

You might suggest that without taxation, land prices for communities, at market-rate, will still be far too high.
There may not be communities left in the relevant areas.
You may suggest there isn't enough time for communities to react to land sales coming on the market.
The public interest test, which tests if a land sale is in the public interest before allowing it, has been abandoned for a less powerful 'transfer test'.
Your opinion that there should be scrutiny of sellers and buyers of land and their plans.

Do you think that 1,000 hectares is an appropriate threshold?

No. It's arbitrary at 1,000 hectares but should be far lower (maybe 500 hectares of land). Too many areas will be unaffected by this threshold.

Section 4

7) Do you, in principle, approve of allowing the Scottish Ministers to make a lotting decision in relation to sales of large landholdings?

Yes. This is about allowing parcels of an estate that comes up for sale, being separated, for a community to purchase some land.

You might, though, raise concerns about other private landowners using this system to buy more land for themselves
You might suggest that land taxation would help lower land purchase prices for communities

If so, do you agree that 1000 hectares is an appropriate threshold?

No. It should be lower - perhaps 500 hectares.

8) Is the proposed process for making a lotting decision appropriate and workable?

Land taxation and reform of compulsory purchase powers and introducing compulsory sales orders in the public good, may be more effective tools.

9) Do the Scottish Government’s proposals for a “transfer test” adequately take the public interest into account?

It doesn't go far enough compared to a 'public interest test' which would scrutinise the sale and purchase of land, the buyer's plans and what land could/should be used for.

Section 6 (final question)

10) Do you support the creation of the new role of Land and Communities Commissioner?

It could be useful depending on their full remit to look after land sales. However, land sales/purchases should be more publicly transparent. Their role could also be to find opportunities for community buyouts and encourage them.

ENDS