When we considered the petition previously, we said that it is a difficult issue and, to be completely honest, I am not sure that the submissions that we have received have made it any clearer. The petitioner said that he is disappointed that Highland Council has not responded. I, too, am disappointed with that, given the situation on Skye that we have heard about.
The Scottish Government has established the crofting bill group, which is tasked with looking at crofting law reform. Our paper points out that the Government has said that, in order to establish the standard security provision for croft tenancies, those tenancies need to be seen as assets. There is a difference of opinion between the petitioner and the Scottish Government on whether the sale of a croft tenancy adversely impacts the system of crofting. That is a subjective issue.
Western Isles Council said that it simply follows the current guidelines and, in essence, treats everything on a case-by-case basis. We need to get the Scottish Government’s views on why there are such discrepancies between local authorities. Does the Scottish Government need to provide more clarity to local authorities that have crofting communities on whether crofting tenancies should be seen as assets?
As I have said previously, I was a member of the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee when it carried out a crofting inquiry, and even Queen’s counsel gave us evidence that crofting law is one of the most complicated legal systems that they deal with. We need to seek further clarification for the petitioner.