Official Report 703KB pdf
16:15
The next item of business is stage 3 proceedings on the Crofting and Scottish Land Court Bill. In dealing with the amendments, members should have the bill as amended at stage 2—that is, SP bill 71A—the marshalled list and the groupings of amendments. The division bell will sound and proceedings will be suspended for around five minutes for the first division of stage 3. The period of voting for the first division will be 30 seconds. Thereafter, I will allow a voting period of one minute for the first division after a debate. Members who wish to speak in the debate on any group of amendments should press their request-to-speak button or enter the letters RTS in the chat function as soon as possible after I call the group.
Members should now refer to the marshalled list of amendments.
Section 1—Enabling environmental uses of crofts
Group 1 is on duties and enforcement. Amendment 1, in the name of Beatrice Wishart, is grouped with amendments 2 to 4, 38 to 42 and 25.
I have only one amendment, and, coincidentally, it is the last one in my name before I leave the Parliament.
Following my stage 2 amendment 168, amendment 1 makes a consequential change to section 19C of the Crofters (Scotland) Act 1993. The stage 2 amendment clarified that a tenant crofter can fulfil their duty to cultivate and maintain the croft either personally, with the help of their family, or with hired labour. Amendment 1 would ensure that the same approach applies to owner-occupier crofters under section 19C, keeping both sets of duties aligned and consistent. I ask members to support my amendment.
I move amendment 1.
I am delighted to support Beatrice Wishart’s final amendment, and, as that might be her final contribution, I would like to say that it has been an absolute pleasure to work with her. She has been an outstanding servant to her constituents, and we will miss her greatly in the next parliamentary session. [Applause.]
I support amendment 1 because it is important that the bill is clear that the flexibility that it offers for satisfying the duties applies equally to owner-occupier crofters.
I turn to my amendments. Amendment 2 will close a loophole that would have allowed someone who had been served a suspected breach of duty notice to submit an assignation application for the sole purpose of preventing the Crofting Commission from putting their other regulatory applications on hold. Amendment 2 will prevent that from happening.
My amendments 3 and 4 will ensure that all appeals under section 26K of the 1993 act are subject to the same rules, including the 42-day time limit, and the same statutory grounds of appeal.
My amendment 25 will simply reinstate the existing position so that the new duties notice can be sent by ordinary post to crofters and owner-occupier crofters.
I turn to Rhoda Grant’s amendments 38 to 41, all of which I am happy to support. In my many discussions with crofters and stakeholders, I have heard real concerns that some new owner-occupier crofters are not fully aware of their duties before they take on their croft. That is why I have been happy to work with Rhoda Grant on these amendments. Similarly, I am happy to support Rhoda Grant’s amendment 42, which will help to provide valuable guidance to crofters on how the Crofting Commission will assess applications for consent to be absent. I meet regularly with the Crofting Commission’s chief executive officer and chair, and I welcome their commitment to providing interim policy guidance on that and other issues. Such guidance is already available on their website.
I call Rhoda Grant to speak to amendment 38 and other amendments in the group.
I will speak to amendments 38 to 42. I thank the minister for his assistance with the amendments.
Amendments 38 to 41 seek to deal with the issue that often arises when crofts change hands on the open market. People see that croft assignations or crofts themselves are for sale and fall into the trap of believing that they are simply buying a house or a piece of land without any additional obligations. That is why crofts are often left unworked, which falls foul of crofting law. The purpose of my amendments is simply to ensure that anyone who purchases a croft or buys a lease of a croft knows what their obligations are.
New section 19BC of the 1993 act, which is entitled “Regulations on requirement for proposed owner to be aware of owner-occupier duties”, requires Scottish ministers to make, by regulations,
“provision requiring that before any person may … acquire title to a croft as a nominee of a crofter, or … purchase a croft from a constituting landlord, … the Commission must be satisfied that the person is aware of the duties of an owner-occupier crofter under section 19C.”
Amendment 38 would reword the title of the new section—section 11B—introduced by an amendment in my name at stage 2 and would make a consequential change to the title of new section 19BC, to reflect the changes that would be made by amendment 40.
Amendment 39 would modify new section 19BC by substituting “may” for “must”, meaning that the power to make regulations would be discretionary rather than there being a duty to do so. That would resolve a technical issue, because making regulations under the affirmative procedure is not necessarily within the minister’s gift, as, strictly speaking, such regulations are subject to the approval of Parliament before they can be made by ministers.
Amendment 40 would modify new section 19BC to reframe the duty so that regulations would need to make provision
“about how a person is to satisfy the Commission that the person is aware of the duties of an owner-occupier crofter under section 19C before the person”
acquires or purchases the croft. That would mean that the imposition would be on the person who is acquiring or purchasing the croft to satisfy the commission that they were aware, rather than the commission having a duty to satisfy itself of that person’s awareness. Indeed, that could be difficult, given that no existing mechanism would make the commission aware of such a transfer.
Amendment 41 would insert a new subsection (1A), which sets out a non-exhaustive list of things that regulations under section 19C(1) “may” make provision about. Those include:
“the steps which must or may be taken by a person to satisfy the Commission of the person’s awareness of the duties, and … the effect of a failure to take such steps.”
Amendment 42 deals with a crofter’s application to be absent from a croft. Gaining consent to be absent should not be used by crofters as a way of avoiding their duties under crofting law. Crofters often apply to be absent, and the agreements on absence are quite often open ended. Of course there are times when a crofter would need to be absent—for example, to attend to training, or for healthcare and the like—but an agreement on absence should not allow people simply to hold crofts with no intention of returning to them. Amendment 42 would require the Crofting Commission to publish guidance on how it exercises its functions under sections 21B to 21D of the 1993 act, which are on consent for absence from crofts. That guidance will set out for crofters the commission’s policy on how it will assess an application for consent to be absent. It will also provide direction and support to help crofters prepare such an application.
Labour also supports the other amendments in the group.
I call Beatrice Wishart to wind up and to press or withdraw amendment 1.
I press amendment 1.
Amendment 1 agreed to.
Section 4—Enforcement of duties
Amendments 2 to 4 moved—[Jim Fairlie]—and agreed to.
Section 8—Assignations to family members
Group 2 is on assignations. Amendment 34, in the name of Rhoda Grant, is grouped with amendment 35.
Amendment 34 would amend section 8 of the Crofters (Scotland) Act 1993 to provide a simplified process for obtaining the commission’s consent to an assignation of a croft if certain conditions, which are set out in the proposed new section 8(2B) and which primarily relate to the assignation to a family member, are met.
Section 11B of the bill will further modify section 8 of the 1993 act by inserting a new subsection (1C), which will provide that the commission may not grant consent or approval to an assignation
“unless it is satisfied that the proposed assignee is aware of the duties they would have as a crofter, following any such assignation, under sections 5AA, 5B and 5C”
of the 1993 act. Amendment 34 would have the effect of providing that proposed new subsection (1C) would not apply in relation to fast-tracked assignations to family members where the commission is satisfied that conditions in proposed new subsection (2B) are met. I thank the minister for his help with the amendment.
I do not agree with amendment 35, which would remove the three-croft limit from family assignations. Although most family assignations are likely to be to an assignee who is already working the crofts and has helped to run the business, I note that the subsection that would be removed by the amendment will only allow scrutiny by the commission. It will not mean that the commission will deny such assignations; it will simply provide a safeguard to ensure that people do not accumulate crofts that could be better used.
I move amendment 34.
Amendment 35 is my only amendment to the bill, so I will just speak briefly to it.
Section 8 of the bill, which deals with assignations to family members, will amend the 1993 act. The bill, as amended at stage 2, will insert two new subsections in section 8 of the act.
The 1993 act prevents a crofter from assigning their croft unless consent is received by the commission. It requires the crofter to apply for consent and specifies what the commission must do if the croft in question is unregistered.
The bill as amended outlines what action must be taken if the commission is satisfied that certain conditions have been met in relation to an unregistered croft. One of those conditions is that
“the proposed assignee is not entered in the Register of Crofts as the tenant or owner-occupier crofter of three or more crofts”.
My amendment 35 would delete that.
There are two reasons for deleting the condition. First, there is a concern that, if it remains in the bill, the process of transferring crofts could be slowed down in certain circumstances, whereas the original idea was to speed things up.
Secondly—this is the main reason for lodging the amendment—crofters have been in touch with me to say that, with regard to the stipulation that the proposed assignee should not have three or more crofts, three is an arbitrary number and fails to consider regional diversity in croft ownership, particularly in some of our island areas.
Therefore, I propose that the condition should be deleted to speed things up and recognise regional difference.
I am very happy to support Rhoda Grant’s amendment 34. Crofters want a genuinely fast-tracked process. I have heard that at first hand, particularly on my tour of the crofting counties over the summer, when I sat down with crofters and asked what their biggest ask was. That was it, and that is what section 8 of the bill will provide.
I agree with Rhoda Grant that there is no need for an extra check that family assignees are aware of their crofting duties. We should not be building an extra piece of process where there is no need for one to be put in.
However, I cannot agree with Tim Eagle’s amendment 35, which would allow for fast-tracked family assignations to a crofter who already has three crofts or more. In some cases, a community might be happy for one person to acquire multiple crofts, but, in others, that would be an area of concern. Even for family assignation, it is right that the local crofting community should be able to have a say on proposed assignations to a person who already has three or more crofts. As Rhoda Grant has pointed out, that does not mean that the commission will not still grant the assignation, but there is no reason why it should not go through the process. Tim Eagle’s amendment 35 would deny the community that right. For that reason, I encourage Mr Eagle not to move the amendment; if he does, I encourage members to oppose it.
I call Rhoda Grant to wind up and to press or withdraw amendment 34.
I will press amendment 34. I have nothing else to add.
The question is, that amendment 34 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division. Members should cast their vote now.
I am terribly sorry—there will not be a division immediately. We have to suspend, because this is the first division of the stage 3 amendment stage. I suspend for around five minutes to allow members to access the digital voting system.
16:29
Meeting suspended.
16:35
On resuming—
We will proceed with the division on amendment 34. Members should cast their votes now.
For
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP)
Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP)
Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green)
Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind)
Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind)
Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP)
Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD)
Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green)
Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green)
Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP)
Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP)
McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP)
McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP)
McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab)
Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP)
Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD)
Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green)
Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab)
Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green)
Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP)
Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP)
Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab)
Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP)
Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP)
Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab)
Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP)
Against
Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)
Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con)
Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con)
Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con)
Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con)
Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con)
Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con)
Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con)
Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con)
Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con)
Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con)
McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con)
Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con)
Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con)
The result of the division is: For 81, Against 25, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 34 agreed to.
Amendment 35 not moved.
Section 8A—New crofts: power to determine applicant will become the owner-occupier crofter
Group 3 is on environmental and other purposeful uses. Amendment 5, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendments 43 to 46, 15, 16, 16A, 17 to 21, 47 and 29 to 31.
My amendments in the group seek to clarify the powers of the commission when it considers proposals by a grazings committee for the grazings to be used as woodlands or for an environmental purpose. They also seek to make technical modifications or changes that are consequential to other provisions in the bill.
Amendment 5 seeks to correct the reference to “other purposeful use” in section 3AZA of the 1993 act, which is inserted by section 8A of the bill, so that it applies to owner-occupied crofts.
Amendment 15 is consequential on a stage 2 amendment in the name of Tim Eagle, which I was happy to support. The landlord’s deadline for responding to a grazings committee application is mentioned twice in section 18, and amendment 15 seeks to change the second reference from six weeks to eight weeks, in line with the change that was made at stage 2.
My amendments 29 to 31 are also consequential. The bill will give tenant crofters the right to put their croft to an environmental use, and consequential changes are needed to provisions of the 1993 act that refer to the uses to which a croft can be put—they are section 30, on compensation for improvements; section 58, on the commission’s decision making; and schedule 2, on the statutory conditions of tenure. The necessary changes will be made by amendments 29 to 31 respectively.
I am happy to support Alasdair Allan’s amendments 16 to 21, which seek to clarify important changes that the bill will make. They seek to make it clear that the commission, not the landowner, will have the final say on a grazings committee application for the common grazings to be used for an environmental purpose or for forestry.
Rhoda Grant’s amendments 43 to 46 propose changes to the landowner’s role in that process. I am happy to support amendment 46, because it is right that the owner should be required to specify any conditions that they wish to impose and the rationale for them, but I cannot support amendments 43 to 45, which would reinstate three words that were removed from the bill at stage 2 through amendments that I supported.
Amendments 43 to 45 would forbid the owner from refusing consent on the grounds of detriment, hardship or loss, unless those impacts were substantial, undue or significant. At stage 2, I argued that those words were unnecessary because, with the bill, we are strengthening the role of the commission. In future, the final decision will lie with the commission, which will decide how much weight should be given to a decision to refuse consent on account of, for example, detriment to the management of the estate. The commission will set out its reasons for its decisions on such applications. We want that process to be—as far as is possible—the standard process that will apply to all decisions, so that the commission considers the wider public interest when it takes a view on the balance of the benefits and the drawbacks of the scheme.
Rhoda Grant’s amendment 16A would require that, in imposing any conditions of its own, the commission must act reasonably and must set out its reasons for decisions, including why they are justified. I think that we all agree that the commission should do that anyway. However, as a public body, the commission is already under a statutory obligation to act reasonably and to communicate fully the reasons for its decisions. Duplicating those obligations in the bill would be bad law and, for that reason, I ask members to oppose amendment 16A.
Finally, Rhoda Grant’s amendment 47 would provide that grazings committees should be entitled to all the financial benefit from an approved crofter-led forestry or environmental initiatives on the common grazings. In respect of forestry, that would cut across the measures that are already in the bill that ensure that a grazings committee will continue to have exclusive economic and recreational use of woodlands on its grazings. With regard to other environmental uses, the provision would sit uncomfortably with new section 50AA of the 1993 act, which provides for grazings committees to be able to enter into binding joint venture agreements with the owner of the grazings with the consent of the commission. I believe that the measures that we have set out in the bill deliver the right balance that will ensure that crofting communities can benefit from environmental uses of common grazings. As part of the wider review of crofting law, we are committed to carefully considering how natural capital markets can support vibrant crofting communities.
I turn to the wider issues of natural capital and financial benefits that must be looked at in a wider cross-Government space to ensure that natural capital markets support vibrant crofting communities. A lot of the detailed work on the natural capital markets is on-going, but it would be premature to set out in legislation at this stage how any financial benefit from a scheme should be shared between landlords and tenants. Therefore, I cannot support amendment 47.
I move amendment 5.
I will speak to amendments 43 to 46, 16A and 47. As the minister said, the bill was amended at stage 2 to remove the words “substantially”, “undue” and “significantly”. I wanted to see those words put back into the bill, because I believe that landowners cannot spuriously stop developments on a croft. That was before I saw the new section 50ZA and, given the minister’s assurances, I do not intend to move those amendments.
Amendment 46 would add a paragraph to the section that states that, should the owner add conditions to consent for environmental purposes, they must specify why they are imposing them and why they believe that they are reasonable.
I have listened to what the minister said about amendment 16A and I accept his assurances, so I will not seek to move that amendment.
On amendment 47, when we were taking evidence on the climate change plan, the committee heard that there were issues with progress and questions about who was responsible for the environmental use of a croft that was holding back peatland restoration, for example. At the moment, a crofter is entitled to cut peat and plant trees on their crofts—indeed, we have forest crofts. However, there is a concern that, if the crofter invests time, labour and finance in forestry or peatland restoration, the landlord will try to sell the carbon credits over their head. Amendment 47 therefore seeks to ensure that the financial benefit of any crofter’s activity remains with the crofter. That is custom and practice and it is wise to set it out in law. The landowner has no control over the peat or trees on a croft or common grazing, and therefore they cannot take any benefit from that work, because they have no idea what will happen to those trees or peat in the future.
At stage 2, the Scottish Government stated that there was a legal difficulty with including carbon credits in the bill, because they were not legally defined. Therefore, amendment 47 does not use the term “carbon credits” but it seeks to ensure that crofters get value from their endeavours. There is nothing in amendment 47 that would prevent crofters from entering into joint agreements with a landowner. The problem is that the landowner is not part of that joint agreement and does not want to take part, but is sitting back and hoping to make financial benefit from it. I therefore believe that amendment 47 is necessary.
I do not think that the matter should be determined in the court. Crofting is different from other patterns of ownership in that the crofter is already entitled to the peat and forestry on their croft, and nobody else should be able to take that from them. I will therefore move amendment 47.
16:45
I will speak to my amendments 16 to 21. Proposed new sections 50 and 50ZA of the 1993 act make changes to the regime for crofter-led forestry projects on common grazings and, importantly, also extend that regime to other crofter-led environmental projects. A system whereby the grazings committee has to get separate consent from both the landowner and the commission is to be replaced by one in which the commission has the final say. The commission must, of course, consider the owner’s views, but alongside other factors such as the benefit to the crofting community and the public interest. In short, my amendments would ensure that the commission, and not the landowner, has the final say on crofter-led environmental projects.
Amendment 16 clarifies that the commission has full discretion to substitute its own decision when it considers that an owner’s original decision was unreasonable. That would apply whether the owner’s decision was to refuse outright, to put conditions on the project, or to approve it.
Amendment 21 expands the list of factors that the commission must take into account in reaching its decision, in line with the commission’s standard decision-making criteria as set out in section 58A(7) of the 1993 act. That list will now include the interests of the estate, the interests of the crofting community and the sustainable development of the crofting community, as well as such things as the public interest and any objections received. In addition, amendment 21 requires the commission to take account of the owner’s decision, including the reasons stated by the owner for any refusal.
Other changes within amendment 21 and in amendments 17 to 20 will remove duplication and correct cross-references.
I call the minister to wind up.
I have nothing further to add.
Amendment 5 agreed to.
Section 10A—Power to make provision about the sale of owner-occupied crofts
We come to group 4, on common grazings. Amendment 6, in the name of Alasdair Allan, is grouped with amendments 7 to 14 and 48 to 50.
I will speak to my amendment 6, but I begin by saying that I strongly support sections 14A and 15 of the bill, which will prevent the further separation of grazing shares from crofts, which has been an unfortunate consequence of the crofter’s right to buy and has been detrimental to crofting. I will also support the minister’s amendments 7 to 14, which will strengthen those sections still further.
My own amendment 6 would support sections 14A and 15. Section 10A, which was inserted by one of my amendments at stage 2, gives ministers power under the affirmative procedure to make regulations on the transfer of owner-occupied crofts. My amendment 6 would make it clear that that power includes the ability to make provisions on the transfer of associated grazing shares, should it be desirable to strengthen or modify the regime set out in sections 14A and 15.
I move amendment 6.
I am happy to support Alasdair Allan’s amendment 6, for the reasons that he has set out. The link between owner-occupied crofts and grazing rights is a complicated area in which property law and crofting law intersect, so it is sensible for ministers to have regulation-making powers in case the provisions on the grazing shares of owner-occupied crofts require to be refined in the future.
My own amendments in the group also concern that connection between grazing rights and owner-occupied crofts. It is an area of law where the policy intention is clear and, I think, agreed by everyone involved, but the means of achieving it is definitely not simple.
A tenanted croft generally comes with an attached right to use common grazings and, in legal terms, the grazing right is a pertinent of the tenancy. Our policy is that grazing rights should stay attached to crofts, no matter what changes a croft goes through. It might be bought by its tenant and become an owner-occupied croft, and it might then be sold or even re-let to a new tenant. It might fall vacant and eventually be re-let by the Crofting Commission. However, the policy aim is that, no matter what happens to a croft, the grazing right should, by default, stay attached to it.
The only exception should be that, if there is a specific application to separate the grazing right from the croft, that should be treated like any other application to divide a croft. The separation may happen only if the Crofting Commission consents, and it will take account of the current and future interests of the crofting community, among other things, in its decision-making process. That is what sections 14A and 15 are designed to achieve.
However, because this is a complex area of law, officials have drawn on advice from a small group of stakeholders and experts, many of whom are practising crofting solicitors, to look closely at those two sections. I am extremely grateful to those people for giving up their time to help us to get this right. My amendments at stage 2, and now at stage 3, have been informed by those discussions between my officials and that group.
Amendments 7, 10 and 11 will clarify the wording of the bill but will not materially change the purpose of the provisions.
Amendment 8 will remove from the bill a change that we proposed to make to the right to buy an apportionment. That was never a core part of the provisions on retaining grazing rights with crofts and, following input from the group of advisers, I have decided that it is best not to venture into that territory without further examination of the legal implications of any proposed change.
Amendment 9 will clarify that, when an owner-occupied croft is let, an attached share may have one of two legal forms. It also covers the circumstance where the owner-occupier crofter is letting only part of the croft. In that circumstance, they will be able to specify whether the grazing right is attached to the part that is let or the part that is not. Again, however, that will be subject to the commission’s consent.
Amendments 12 and 14 will clarify who has the right to re-let a vacant grazings right. The Land Court has ruled that that should be the person who was the landlord of the inby croft when it was a tenanted croft, or their successor in title. Sometimes that person is not the same as the person who owns the land over which the grazing rights are exercised, and sometimes, perhaps after a passage of years, they cannot be traced. Amendment 14 provides that we will follow the Land Court’s principle whenever possible but that, pragmatically, we will allow the grazings owner to take over the role if need be.
Amendment 13 will allow a longer timescale for the letting of vacant shares in order to allow for the commission’s necessary exchanges with both the owner and the grazings committee.
Amendment 13 seeks to increase, from three months to five months, the time for the Crofting Commission to respond. People already complain that it takes far too long to do so. Can the minister give an assurance that people will not have to wait five months for a response from the commission?
It will be for the commission to make those determinations. I hope that the crofting community, Rhoda Grant and other members who have engaged with what is happening will see that the Crofting Commission has sped up its provisions to make sure that it is getting the work done far more timeously than was the case in the past.
I turn to Edward Mountain’s amendments 48 to 50. In the debate on the bill at stage 1, there was strong cross-party consensus on two points: first, that the bill contains a number of important and valuable crofting reforms; and, secondly, that the next step must be a more strategic and fundamental review of crofting to identify a direction of travel for the coming decades. That review will, of course, include common grazings. I support that approach and I will say more about it when we consider amendment 26, which will commit ministers to a review of crofting legislation in general.
Issues concerning common grazings are among the most important ones that the future review will consider. I recognise the issues that Edward Mountain has raised, and I am happy to support amendment 50, which will commit the next Government to consulting on them. I thank him for his contributions on this important matter.
I thank the minister for taking the time to meet me and trying to find compromise. Sometimes that is not possible, but he tried very hard on this, and for that I am grateful.
In relation to common grazings, I am sad that we have not resolved the issue of what are often called slipper crofters. There are real issues where crofters have moved away and sold their shares in the common grazings to people who are no longer part of the crofting community.
I lodged my amendments 48 to 50 to encourage ministers to commit to a review of the operation of common grazings. I wanted such a consultation to be undertaken within three years; the minister wanted the time period to be much longer, although no figure was put on that; and he has compromised by making it five years, which is fair.
The reason that I was pushing for such a review is that 1,078 common grazings in Scotland, which cover more than 500,000 hectares, are recorded in the register of crofts. Of those, only 461—fewer than half—have common grazing committees in place.
Considering the amount of land involved, and the significance of crofting in reaching net zero, which will be a high priority for the next Parliament, it is important that we utilise common grazings and that crofters benefit from them, to the extent that they can, and that the country benefits from them, too.
I will say no more, except that I will not move amendment 48 or amendment 49, and that I would appreciate the support of the Government on amendment 50.
I will speak to Edward Mountain’s amendments 48, 49 and 50. It is a helpful step for everyone who is involved with common grazings that ministers should consult with experts to achieve better guidance.
That is a useful backstop to amendment 26, to which the minister has already spoken, and which we will get to in group 8. Getting the timing right is important. I appreciate the intention behind Edward Mountain’s amendment 50, which is one that the Green Party is likely to support.
I invite Alasdair Allan to wind up and to press or withdraw amendment 6.
I press amendment 6.
Amendment 6 agreed to.
After section 10A
Group 5 is on resumption. Amendment 36, in the name of Rhoda Grant, is grouped with amendment 37.
Amendment 36, which is similar to my amendment 188 at stage 2, was lodged ahead of Alasdair Allan’s amendment to new section 50ZA of the 1993 act, as inserted by section 18 of the bill, to add protections for crofters.
However, I still believe that amendment 36 is required, as resumption can take from a crofter their land and work. Surely, if that happens, it must be in the public interest rather than in the interest of the landowner alone. Resumption must not happen for spurious purposes.
Amendment 37 is similar to amendment 47 in my name and relates to financial benefit. The amendment would protect crofters in a scenario in which a landlord attempted to take back a croft to benefit from the financial gain arising from activities carried out on the croft by the crofter. That could include, for example, the sale of carbon credits. It is very important that we protect crofting from the carbon market.
I move amendment 36.
As no other member has sought to speak, I call the minister.
First, I must ask Rhoda Grant not to press amendment 36 or move amendment 37. However, I just want to set out some context with regard to resumption. Current legislative provisions on resumption ensure that crofters are compensated for any loss of land, and they also entitle crofters to 50 per cent of the value achieved by the resumption. The Land Court can reject the resumption application, especially if it is opposed by crofters.
I am aware of renewed concern about resumption in the context of the increased opportunities and incentives from peatland restoration and tree planting. I, too, am genuinely concerned about that, but there is particular concern from crofters who want to take up such opportunities through grazings committees and joint ventures. We are committed to ensuring a balanced approach that protects the rights of the owner and the crofter and, as part of the review, we will very carefully consider whether the law on resumption needs to be updated.
Many resumption applications are made with the consent of the crofter and are for the good of the croft and the crofter. If we were to prevent landlords from resuming the land on the grounds that they might receive financial benefits, as amendment 37 would do, we would prevent crofters from receiving a share of the benefits of a consented project. Even if that project gave crofters 80 per cent of the financial benefit, amendment 37 would not allow the resumption application to be authorised. That is where the problem lies.
I assure Rhoda Grant and other members that I recognise and have genuine sympathy with the issues that they have raised, but I hope that she will accept that we should not take such a significant step without first considering all of the consequences and how they might affect not only the croft owners but the crofters. We will be considering that very carefully as part of the further review.
I call Rhoda Grant to wind up and to press or withdraw amendment 36.
I seek to withdraw amendment 36, given the reassurances that the minister has put on the record that the resumption will not be used against crofters and that they will have adequate protection.
Amendment 36, by agreement, withdrawn.
Amendment 37 not moved.
17:00
Section 11B—Requirement for proposed crofter to be aware of duties
Amendments 38 to 41 moved—[Rhoda Grant]—and agreed to.
After section 11B
Amendment 42 moved—[Rhoda Grant]—and agreed to.
Section 14A—Common grazings: acquisition of shares with croft
Amendments 7 to 9 moved—[Jim Fairlie]—and agreed to.
Section 15—Common grazings: unattached shares etc.
Amendments 10 to 12 moved—[Jim Fairlie]—and agreed to.
The question is, that amendment 13 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division.
The vote is closed.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My app did not connect. I would have voted yes.
Your vote will be recorded.
For
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP)
Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con)
Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP)
Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP)
Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD)
Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green)
Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green)
Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP)
Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP)
McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP)
McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP)
McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP)
Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD)
Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green)
Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green)
Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP)
Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP)
Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP)
Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP)
Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP)
Against
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)
Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con)
Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind)
Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab)
Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con)
Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind)
Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con)
Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con)
Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab)
Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con)
Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con)
Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab)
McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab)
Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con)
Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab)
Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con)
Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab)
Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con)
The result of the division is: For 67, Against 36, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 13 agreed to.
Amendment 14 moved—[Jim Fairlie]—and agreed to.
Section 18—Use of common grazings for forestry or environmental purposes
Amendments 43 to 45 not moved.
Amendment 46 moved—[Rhoda Grant]—and agreed to.
Amendment 15 moved—[Jim Fairlie].
The question is, that amendment 15 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division.
For
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP)
Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con)
Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP)
Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con)
Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con)
Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP)
Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con)
Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD)
Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP)
Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con)
Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP)
Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP)
McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP)
McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP)
McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con)
Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP)
Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD)
Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP)
Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP)
Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP)
Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP)
Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con)
Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con)
Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP)
Against
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green)
Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind)
Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab)
Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab)
Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green)
Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab)
Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green)
Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab)
Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green)
Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab)
Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab)
The result of the division is: For 83, Against 21, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 15 agreed to.
Amendment 16 moved—[Alasdair Allan].
Amendment 16A not moved.
Does Alasdair Allan wish to press or withdraw amendment 16?
I will press amendment 16.
The question is, that amendment 16 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division.
For
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP)
Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con)
Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP)
Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con)
Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green)
Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind)
Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con)
Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind)
Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP)
Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con)
Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD)
Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green)
Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab)
Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green)
Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP)
Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP)
McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP)
McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP)
McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab)
Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con)
Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP)
Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD)
Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green)
Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab)
Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP)
Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP)
Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab)
Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP)
Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP)
Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con)
Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab)
Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con)
Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP)
Against
Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
The result of the division is: For 102, Against 1, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 16 agreed to.
Amendments 17 to 21 moved—[Alasdair Allan].
The question is, that amendments 17 to 21 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division.
For
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP)
Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP)
Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green)
Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind)
Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind)
Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP)
Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD)
Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green)
Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP)
Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP)
McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP)
McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP)
McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab)
Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP)
Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD)
Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green)
Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab)
Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green)
Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP)
Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP)
Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab)
Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP)
Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP)
Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab)
Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP)
Against
Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)
Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con)
Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con)
Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con)
Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con)
Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con)
Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con)
Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con)
Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con)
Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con)
McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con)
Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con)
Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con)
The result of the division is: For 82, Against 22, Abstentions 0.
Amendments 17 to 21 agreed to.
Amendment 47 moved—[Rhoda Grant].
The question is, that amendment 47 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division.
For
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green)
Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind)
Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab)
Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab)
Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green)
Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab)
Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green)
Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab)
Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green)
Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab)
Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab)
Against
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP)
Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con)
Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP)
Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con)
Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con)
Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP)
Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con)
Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con)
Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con)
Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP)
Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con)
Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP)
Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP)
Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP)
McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP)
McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP)
McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP)
McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con)
Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP)
Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD)
Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP)
Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP)
Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP)
Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP)
Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con)
Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con)
Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP)
Abstentions
Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD)
The result of the division is: For 22, Against 84, Abstentions 1.
Amendment 47 disagreed to.
After section 18
Amendments 48 and 49 not moved.
Amendment 50 moved—[Edward Mountain]—and agreed to.
Section 24—Requirement for certain applications for first registration to be copied to landlord
Group 6 is on registration requirements. Amendment 51, in the name of Edward Mountain, is grouped with amendments 52 to 55, 22 to 24, 32 and 33.
I have five amendments—51 to 55—in the group. These amendments are about promoting communication between the crofter and the landlord at the point of registration. We all agree that registration of crofts is absolutely critical and it has been Government policy for a while. The amendments would minimise and simplify the first registration of crofts and to identify any discrepancies at an early stage. The Crofting Commission would prescribe a form of notice to be given by a crofter to the landlord, which would include a copy of the application. That would allow the landlord to comment on the application. I stress that the commission would be required not to act as arbiter but simply to highlight the discrepancies to the Keeper of the Registers of Scotland when the croft was going through the registration process.
The amendments would not add an administrative burden to the commission or put it in the middle of a fight between a landlord and a crofter, if such a thing were ever to happen, but they would flush out potential areas of dispute as the registration process was going ahead. This has come about from my experience of trying to register a croft, which has sometimes been quite difficult because the ownership is quite difficult to identify in title deeds.
The other amendments in the group—22 to 24, 32 and 33—are minor technical amendments in the name of the minister. I confirm that we will support those amendments on this side of the chamber. The minister can talk to them for some length of time if he wishes to, or he could just accept our report and allow us to concentrate on amendments 51 to 55.
I move amendment 51.
I cannot support Edward Mountain’s amendments 51 to 55. On the surface, the amendments are quite harmless, but they are either unnecessary or would not provide any benefit. There is no need for a separate form to be created, because this bill provides the same thing in a simpler and more direct way by requiring the crofter to share the draft application with the landlord 21 days in advance. The draft application includes the map.
The Crofting Commission is responsible for drafting and providing the regulatory applications that are used by its customers. It does that for all applications, whether assignations, decroftings, the creation of a new croft or anything else. In fact, the commission is already in the process of drafting all the forms necessary for this new provision, which will take into account the requirement, as set out in the bill, that the tenant must give a copy of the draft application to the landlord.
When the commission receives a first registration application, it already checks, in accordance with section 7(3) of the Crofting Reform (Scotland) Act 2010, the information contained in or accompanying the application against the information relating to the croft in the register of crofts.
If there is a dispute between the landlord and crofter, that should always remain a matter for the Land Court. Neither the commission nor the keeper has the authority or the skills to resolve registration disputes. That is one of the reasons why we have a specialised court to deal with crofting disputes. I know that Edward Mountain is well aware of that process.
My amendments 22 to 24 are technical amendments that correct aspects of section 27G for consistency with the rest of the bill and with the aim of that section, that decrofting applications can be made only on registered crofts or on a feu croft.
My amendments 32 and 33 will ensure that Ariane Burgess’ successful amendment at stage 2, which we supported and which allows the Crofting Commission to consider a review application to bring a part of an apportionment to an end, also serves as an event that must be registered against a registered croft or common grazing. Those two amendments also ensure that the Crofting Commission can treat all apportionment applications in the same way by including those made between 1955 and 1993 along with those made under the 1993 act.
17:15
I call Edward Mountain to press or withdraw amendment 51.
I will keep this short and sweet. I understand what the minister says, but practical experience tells me that my amendments would be a sensible way forward. Therefore, I will press amendment 51. If it falls, I will not move amendments 52 to 55. The Conservative members will support the other amendments in the group.
The question is, that amendment 51 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division.
For
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)
Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con)
Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con)
Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind)
Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab)
Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con)
Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind)
Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con)
Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con)
Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con)
Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con)
Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab)
Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con)
Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con)
Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab)
McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab)
Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab)
Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con)
Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab)
Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con)
Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab)
Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con)
Against
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP)
Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP)
Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP)
Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD)
Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green)
Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green)
Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP)
Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP)
McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP)
McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP)
McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP)
Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD)
Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green)
Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green)
Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP)
Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP)
Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP)
Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP)
The result of the division is: For 42, Against 66, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 51 disagreed to.
Amendments 52 to 55 not moved.
Section 27G—Decrofting in case of resumption or vacancy of croft: requirement for croft to be registered
Amendments 22 to 24 moved—[Jim Fairlie]—and agreed to.
Section 30—Crofting census notices
Amendment 25 moved—[Jim Fairlie]—and agreed to.
Section 32—Appointed members: special considerations
Group 7 is on Crofting Commission: landlord representation. Amendment 56, in the name of Edward Mountain, is grouped with amendment 57.
The two amendments in my name are the only ones in the group. The amendments relate to the representation of landlords’ interests on the Crofting Commission. Before anyone questions that, I advise that I am not a landlord and I have no landlord’s interest. I am purely a tenant, and not a tenant of a croft.
Currently, the interests of landlords must be represented on the commission, but the bill as drafted would remove that obligation. I make the gentle comment that every croft has a landlord, unless it is an owner-occupied croft—which has a landlord, technically, within the law.
I note that the bill does not remove the current provision on Gaelic speakers being represented on the commission, despite the fact that only 130,000 people in Scotland speak Gaelic, which is 2.5 per cent of the population. I am not disputing the importance of the Gaelic language in the crofting communities. There is therefore a fundamental protection of the language and of some of our rural populations, which I feel very strongly about. However, my amendment 56 would reverse the removal of landlord representation on the commission, reinstating the status quo. If that is unacceptable to the minister—
Will the member take an intervention?
I will just finish this point and then I will come back to Dr Allan.
If amendment 56 is not agreed to, my amendment 57 would provide an option for the commission—without forcing it—to co-opt a member who represents the interests of landlords.
Does the member acknowledge that there are only 11 commonly used irregular verbs in Gaelic? If a landlord wishes to become the Gaelic-speaking representative on the commission, he or she need only learn.
I will not give in to temptation and say that that might prove too difficult for some landlords. As Dr Allan knows, the current representative of landlords’ interests on the commission is a Gaelic speaker, so theirs is dual-hat position. I very much take his point, but I am trying to make sure that there is an equilibrium between the two roles.
As I made clear earlier, it is absolutely vital that common grazings are used by crofters to ensure that the country meets its net zero obligations, not only in peatland restoration but in woodland planting. Having a landlord representative on the commission would ensure that there was no conflict. Giving the commission the flexibility to have a landlord representative would therefore be helpful.
I know that the minister will say that he can co-opt a landlord representative on to the commission, but I want to take that out of the minister’s hands and put it in the commission’s hands, because I would like to see the power at commission level rather than at ministerial level. I await the minister’s comments on that.
I move amendment 56.
I want to make a couple of comments. I do not agree with amendments 56 and 57. Until the previous legislation changed it, the Crofting Commission used to be called the Crofters Commission, which belonged to the crofters and upheld their rights. Putting landlords on the commission as par for the course would not be helpful, regardless of whether they are a Gaelic speaker. The commission should recognise the power imbalance in the relationship between the crofter and the landowner.
I cannot support Edward Mountain’s amendments 56 and 57, but I recognise the importance of landlords’ interests being represented. The bill continues to recognise that in the provisions that he wants to remove. However, with only three appointed commissioners to the board and appointments made only every few years, the commission needs flexibility—and is asking for flexibility—when it comes to selecting the strongest overall mix of skills and experience. That is what the bill provides for: that the Scottish ministers must consult the commission on the desired attributes of a new member before appointing them, while also having regard to the value of a commissioner who can represent landlords’ interests. That approach gives proper weight to the landlord voice, without constraining the minister’s ability to make the best appointment for the commission as a whole.
In addition, I reassure Mr Mountain that the commission is more than willing—in fact, I would expect this—to formalise the relationship between itself and the organisations that represent landlords, and it is happy to have a dedicated commissioner who will consult those organisations on any relevant matters and then feed back to the board at a strategic level.
The Scottish Government supports that initiative, which will ensure that the whole board gains a better understanding of the landlord perspective. As Mr Mountain pointed out, the 1993 act gives ministers the power to increase the number of members on the commission’s board, which could be used to fill any skills gaps if required. I therefore urge Mr Mountain not to press or move his amendments, and if he does, I ask members not to support them.
I call Edward Mountain to wind up and to press or withdraw amendment 56.
I have listened carefully to what the minister has said, which gives me some confidence. However, I will make a small observation: crofting commissioners are paid £10,812 a year for working four and a half days per month. If it were decided that an additional commissioner was required, that would not add overly to the bill.
The minister has highlighted, previously as well as today, that paragraph 3(6) of schedule 1 to the Crofters (Scotland) Act 1993, which is one of the many acts that cover crofting—and my goodness, you need to know your way round them—gives the minister the ability to co-opt an additional member. I would rather that that ability were in the hands of the Crofting Commission, so that it would have the flexibility to make sure that crofting goes from strength to strength.
I will withdraw amendment 56, but I intend to move amendment 57.
Amendment 56, by agreement, withdrawn.
Amendment 57 moved—[Edward Mountain].
The question is, that amendment 57 be agreed to. Are we all agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division.
The vote is closed.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I would have voted no.
Thank you, Ms Todd. I will ensure that that is recorded.
For
Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)
Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con)
Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con)
Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con)
Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con)
Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con)
Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con)
Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con)
Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con)
Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con)
Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con)
Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con)
McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con)
Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con)
Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con)
Against
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP)
Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP)
Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green)
Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind)
Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind)
Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP)
Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD)
Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green)
Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP)
Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP)
McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP)
McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP)
McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab)
Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP)
Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD)
Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green)
Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab)
Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green)
Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP)
Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP)
Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab)
Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP)
Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab)
Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD)
The result of the division is: For 25, Against 80, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 57 disagreed to.
After section 33
Group 8 is on a review of crofting legislation. Amendment 26, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendment 26A.
I agree with members across the chamber that future reform of crofting will be absolutely necessary. The past four years of stakeholder engagement and consultation have been incredibly informative. We now have a bill that has wide stakeholder input and buy-in. However, those discussions have also shown us that there is a diverse range of views within the crofting sector.
That is why, following discussions with stakeholders and members from all parties, I propose that we carry out a review of crofting legislation. In order to assess the effectiveness of the legislation, we need to be clear about what it is that we want to deliver. Therefore, we all, including stakeholders, need time to consider what crofting policy should be in the future.
We are committed to working closely with stakeholders, crofters, landlords and everyone else who is involved in the sector. It is important to build consensus and to find solutions that will stand the test of time, and that is what we need to do. Establishing clear policy outcomes will take time and will be central to future wholesale reform.
17:30
The review will include the 1993 and 2010 acts, and it will also include this bill when it becomes an act. Therefore, requiring the review to be started within three years at the latest will allow this bill a period of time to bed in and for its full impact and effectiveness to be measured and assessed. That includes the full impact of the many changes that the Crofting Commission is planning to make to its policy plan and its approach to enforcing regulatory duties.
It is right that we allow up to three years for an incoming Government to decide its approach. However, I put on the record that, if my party remains in government, we will commence the review within two years of royal assent, well ahead of the three-year deadline, and we will seek to build on the engagement that we have carried out during this parliamentary session. I hope that that provides members with the reassurance that they need regarding my party’s on-going commitment to crofting reform.
I remember that we started looking at the issue of crofting reform when I first came into the Parliament in 2016. It was agreed that crofting reform is not just about crofting but about keeping the population in the crofting areas and providing a sanctuary for language and people on the land. When the review is to be carried out on the legislation, of which there are numerous acts—too numerous to mention—will it first detail what the aims of crofting should be for the future? If we do not set out those aims, we will not be able to protect crofting and ensure that it thrives for many years to come.
I am glad that Edward Mountain put that on the record. He is right: crofting is about people, culture, history and what the future of Scotland looks like. For me, any review of crofting must take all those things in the round and make sure that we deliver what the people of Scotland and the crofting communities want.
Rhoda Grant’s amendment 26A would require the review to start within 12 months of royal assent. I worry that that could prove to be too soon after the extensive changes that will be made by this bill. I ask Rhoda Grant to support my amendment 26 and not to press amendment 26A. That will allow the bill that is before us to bed in so that we can then do a proper review in order to know exactly where we stand and where we are trying to go.
I move amendment 26.
My concern is that amendment 26 will require a report after three years, which would limit any practical chance of introducing new crofting legislation in the next session. I heard what the minister said about allowing the bill to bed in. However, we all know that there are huge gaps in the bill, which is about administration rather than the future policy that will surround crofting. He acknowledged that there is agreement across industry stakeholders and most political parties that crofting needs new law and needs to be modified at pace.
This bill was promised not in this parliamentary session but in the previous one, and we waited until the end of this parliamentary session for it to be introduced. However, it will not really make any changes to policy. Therefore, I seek to change the reporting period to 12 months—
Will the member take an intervention?
Yes.
I hear the point that Rhoda Grant is making. However, she should bear in mind that there have been four years of on-going work on the bill from when work on it first started. The provision that is in amendment 26 is for the review to begin up to three years after royal assent, but that is a backstop. The review will start within that three-year period and, if we return to government, I hope that we would start it within two years. We must get it right and allow the bill that is currently before us to bed in in order to allow people to see how it will work, and then we can work out what we will do going forward. We give that commitment.
I hope that the bill demonstrates that we take crofting seriously and that we want to make sure that we provide a firm future for crofting in Scotland by making sure that we get it right in the first place.
I agree that it must be got right, because part of this bill is about putting right some of the wrongs that happened before.
With that reassurance, I will not seek to press amendment 26A.
I ask Ms Grant to move the amendment at this point—we will come back to it.
Okay—I move amendment 26A.
Thank you. I call Ariane Burgess.
I express my thanks to the minister for taking on board the amendments that Tim Eagle and I lodged at stage 2 and amalgamating them into amendment 26 at this stage. It is vital that the next Government and session 7’s cohort of MSPs take a deep look at the present crofting legislation, at how we can tackle the big issues facing the crofting community and at how the existing body of legislation can be streamlined and simplified. In fact, I have just been having a chat with my colleague Gillian Mackay about an anomaly in Brora. Those are the kinds of things that we need to address. I urge the Scottish Government to front load the key issues in that piece of work, including common grazings and crofting tenancies. The three-year time limit for getting that work under way is reasonable. I hear Rhoda Grant’s points about wanting the review to happen sooner, but I take on board the Government’s points about needing to get deep into the work and unravel a whole lot of issues.
I am therefore not minded to support Rhoda Grant’s amendment 26A.
Amendment 26A, by agreement, withdrawn.
Amendment 26 agreed to.
After section 39
Group 9 is entitled “Land Court: reviews and guidance”. Amendment 28, in the name of Ariane Burgess, is grouped with amendment 27.
The merger of the Scottish Land Court and the Lands Tribunal for Scotland is welcome. It will bring greater clarity and consistency to how land‑related matters are handled. As part of the changes, matters concerning access rights will transfer from the sheriff courts to the merged court. Amendment 28 will support that transition. It will ensure that, before the transfer of jurisdiction, guidance issued under section 27 of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 will be updated to reflect the Scottish Land Court’s new role.
Although I accept that the Government would naturally update that guidance in due course, I feel that it is important to place a clear legal requirement on ministers to do so. Local authorities and others who rely on the guidance need certainty that it will be revised at the right time. Amendment 28 will help to ensure a smooth and well‑understood transition.
In relation to the other amendment in the group—amendment 27, in the name of Jim Fairlie—it is prudent of the Scottish Government to commit to a review of how the merged Land Court is getting on. I am especially pleased that the amendment will require ministers to assess whether further areas of environmental law might be suitable for transfer to the Land Court and to communicate that assessment to the Parliament. I believe that amendment 27 will make a clear case for what I called for at stage 2: that we should enable the Land Court to become an environmental court.
I move amendment 28.
I thank Ariane Burgess for lodging and explaining amendment 28. I agree that, as access rights matters transfer to the merged Scottish Land Court, it is essential that the supporting guidance properly reflects the new arrangements. The Government would, of course, update the section 27 guidance as part of implementing those changes. However, I recognise that amendment 28 will ensure that the update happens in advance of the new jurisdiction taking effect, allowing those who use the system to be ready for the change. For that reason, the Scottish Government is happy to support amendment 28.
At stage 2, Ariane Burgess and Tim Eagle brought forward proposals seeking a review mechanism. I appreciate the points that they raised, and amendment 27 responds directly to those concerns by including a clear and structured review duty in the bill. Amendment 27 provides a statutory mechanism to review the effect of the merger of the Scottish Land Court and the Lands Tribunal for Scotland. Importantly, before any review is carried out, there is a safeguard with regard to judicial independence, with a requirement to consult the Lord President. That will ensure that the judiciary’s perspective is properly considered as the work is undertaken.
Amendment 27 requires the Scottish ministers to review each new area of jurisdiction three years after it comes into force. I believe that that provides the right amount of time for the changes to bed in and for evidence to emerge about how the new arrangements are working. A key element involves ensuring that the judicial, operational and user experience is fully reflected in the process, and the framework provides that insight to be drawn on as part of each review. That will help to identify whether any refinements are needed to support the effective operation of the court.
In line with the policy intention that the court’s remit may develop over time, ministers must also assess whether any further areas of environmental law may be suitable for transfer into the court’s jurisdiction. Following a review or assessment, a report must be prepared and laid before the Parliament, setting out the findings and whether any legislative changes are proposed.
Taken together, the provisions create a proportionate and evidence-based framework for monitoring how the court’s expanded jurisdiction is operating and for informing any future development. I invite members to support amendment 27.
I call Ariane Burgess to wind up and to press or withdraw amendment 28.
I have nothing further to add. I press amendment 28.
The question is, that amendment 28 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division.
For
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP)
Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP)
Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con)
Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green)
Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind)
Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind)
Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP)
Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD)
Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green)
Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green)
Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP)
Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP)
McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP)
McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP)
McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab)
Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP)
Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD)
Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green)
Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab)
Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green)
Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP)
Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP)
Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab)
Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP)
Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP)
Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab)
Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP)
Against
Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)
Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con)
Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con)
Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con)
Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con)
Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con)
Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con)
Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con)
Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con)
Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con)
Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con)
McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con)
Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con)
Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con)
The result of the division is: For 82, Against 28, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 28 agreed to.
Amendment 27 moved—[Jim Fairlie]—and agreed to.
Schedule 2—Minor and consequential amendments
Amendments 29 to 33 moved—[Jim Fairlie]—and agreed to.
That ends consideration of amendments.
As members know, I am required, under standing orders, to decide whether, in my view, any provision of a bill relates to a protected subject matter—that is, whether it modifies the electoral system and franchise of Scottish parliamentary elections. In the case of the Crofting and Scottish Land Court Bill, no provision of the bill relates to a protected subject matter. Therefore, the bill does not require a supermajority to be passed at stage 3.
Previous
Business Motion