Scottish Land Commission (Number of Land Commissioners) Regulations 2026 (SSI 2026/284)
09:08
Our third item of business is consideration of a Scottish statutory instrument. It was laid under the negative procedure, which means that it will come into force unless the Parliament agrees a motion to annul it. Such a motion has been lodged by Donald MacKinnon, who joins us. Given that the motion was lodged recently, the committee will not consider it in full at today’s meeting; we will bring it back for consideration at a future meeting. However, given that Donald is here, I invite him to offer some brief comments on why he has lodged the motion to annul. After that, I will move on to comments from members of the committee.
Thank you for allowing me to attend and speak to the committee today. This week, I lodged a motion to annul the statutory instrument laid by the Scottish Government to reduce the number of land commissioners from five to four, and I appreciate the opportunity to explain why.
Only last year, the Parliament considered the structure of the Land Commission, among other matters. Following those deliberations, MSPs passed the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2025, creating a new land and communities commissioner in addition to the existing five land commissioners and the tenant farming commissioner. As far as I am aware, the Government made no attempts at that time to reduce the number of land commissioners, so why is the Government proposing to do that now? We do not know.
In my opinion, the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Action and Rural Affairs has failed to explain why the decision has been taken not to fill the current vacancy on the board. I am particularly concerned that the only explanation being given by the cabinet secretary is a financial one. References have been made to public service reform in correspondence to the committee and in the policy note that accompanies the SSI. Is it now Scottish Government policy to not replace board members of a statutory body if a member resigns, in the name of public service reform and saving money? If that is the case, it is very significant and it highlights the need for scrutiny of the proposed change by the committee and the Parliament.
I am also concerned that the change will make it harder for the Government to fulfil its statutory duty to take “every reasonable step” to ensure that a member of the Land Commission’s board is a Gaelic speaker and that all the skills that are listed in the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2016 are represented on the board. I do not think that adequate consideration has been given to how the change will affect the function of the Land Commission and its ability to deliver its statutory functions. The policy note refers to the Land Commission chair and the chief executive being “informed” instead of consulted about the decision.
I urge the committee to annul the SSI when you come to consider it.
Thank you, Donald. Are there any comments from members?
I thank Donald MacKinnon for his straightforward explanation as to why he lodged his motion to annul. I agree with him that the Government’s introduction of this regulation proposing a reduction in the number of land commissioners is not entirely justified by either what the cabinet secretary has said or the policy note that accompanies it. There are lots of unanswered questions, including what the financial saving is, which I suspect is too minimal to justify it under public service reform.
Our papers indicate that the Land Commission has discussed the regulations at board level, but we have no indication as to what the board’s opinion really is and whether it has the capacity to absorb the reduction in commissioner numbers to enable it to undertake its work under the 2025 act. When we questioned Hamish Trench last week about the loss of a Gaelic speaker on the commission, he indicated that they were looking to fill that gap in the future recruitment of a land commissioner but that it could be some time away, leaving the Land Commission without Gaelic input, which is so important, as he indicated. Gaelic speaking and land issues are inextricably linked. Those are my views on the issue.
There is certainly an opportunity for the committee to ask the cabinet secretary, the Government as a whole and probably the Land Commission for further information when we consider Donald MacKinnon’s motion.
As there are no further comments, are members content with the proposal that we write to the Scottish Government and the Scottish Land Commission, seeking further information? There will, of course, be an opportunity on 18 November, Donald, for you to come back. Are members content to delegate authority to me to draft a letter that reflects the concerns and comments of the committee?
Members indicated agreement.
I will suspend the meeting briefly to bring in our panel of witnesses.
09:14
Meeting suspended.
09:16
On resuming—
Next
Outdoor Access