Chamber and committees

I am afraid that I cannot speak about what happened at the passage of the act, as I was not in Government at the time, but any additional statutory responsibilities placed on local authorities are borne in mind when the local government settlement is considered. I know that the committee is and will be looking closely at this year’s settlement. For the purposes of the act, when legislation creates additional statutory responsibilities, that will be considered and will be part of the settlement, because it is part of the core funding. We expect local authorities to fund it from there.

No. First, it is about believing that more people and organisations should have the opportunity to own more land. Secondly, it is about giving communities as much time as possible to prepare for the purchase, if that is something that they want to pursue.

As I said, it is a substantial task, but it is probably right that it is. We believe that with rights come responsibilities. That goes for large landowners under land reform legislation just as it does for a community organisation that is looking to buy land, but the more time and support that they have, which the Scottish Government provides under land reform legislation, the better.

Yes—exactly.

I am keen that that group remains quite tight. However, I am interested in what the committee recommended about a national partnership forum. We already fund GrowGreen Scotland to the tune of about £20,000 per annum, in part to co-ordinate the community growing forum. My officials and I will go away and consider the extent to which the role that the group is undertaking is akin to what the committee has recommended as regards a national forum. We will see whether that role is already being fulfilled or what changes may be required or are desirable.

The figure for GrowGreen Scotland is £19,800 per annum. No, we have not yet looked at the costs of a national forum. I need to consider that, and it will require careful consideration about not just the costings but, equally, the value of a forum to the Scottish Government and to local authorities. As of today, a considerable bit of work is under way, backed by annual funding of nearly £20,000, which I think we will agree is not insignificant in the circumstances. I want to go away and compare what is being done now against that which the committee has suggested and consider what the gap is and how we might fill it, if that would be beneficial.

There is no doubt that there is a substantial number of individual examples of the 2015 act having a positive impact, and not just through what the act has allowed local authorities to do and local communities to benefit from. We need to accept that there is a signalling effect by a Government creating primary legislation that makes those obligations, rights and responsibilities clear.

However, some years down the line, we cannot be blind to the fact that there are some ways in which things do not appear to have worked as we had expected. Waiting lists are long and growing; as you have identified, the availability of land remains a problem; and I know that the committee sees that the disparity of experience remains a problem. On the latter point, that could be so, but, equally, I am mindful of the need to recognise the different experiences in local authorities across the country. We all come from different parts of the country, and we will see different need. We need to remember that local authorities are dealing with different situations.

Your first point was about data gathering. The act does not place duties on the Scottish Government to collect or benchmark data. I am open to the idea that that could be explored. You suggested that the annual allotment reports might be a suitable place from which to do that, and I will consider whether that is doable and what the benefits would be to local authorities and the Scottish Government.

Thank you. I will take that on board.

It is part of the block grant so, again, an assessment is made of the responsibilities of local authorities and the extent to which they may have increased in any given year owing to legislation. The block grant is the final figure from which we would expect it to come. I do not need to tell the committee about this year’s block grant; I am sure that you are looking closely at it.

Prioritisation was given to local energy production in the light of the cost of living crisis and things like that.

My initial reaction is to say that that is certainly something to be done at local authority level. Local authorities are best placed to respond to their own lists.

Interestingly, I note that, in your report, you say that lists might not be accurate because some people on them might have got allotments, moved or whatever, so there would be a bit of work for local authorities to do to ensure the accuracy of the waiting lists. A mapping exercise on the amount of land that is needed, if it were to be done, should certainly be done at the local level.

Thank you.