Chamber and committees

Constituents have raised a broader concern with me, which is that there is a sense that there has been a bit of tinkering around the edges of existing schemes rather than the transformational change that was promised in the vision for agriculture.

The Government has failed to deliver its initial plan of a menu of measures for tier 2 of agriculture reform, and stakeholders have raised with me that the changes are a very poor alternative. They have raised questions on the Government’s ability to deliver better outcomes for nature and climate through stronger conditionality. I want to put on the record that people are raising concerns that we are not getting into the agricultural vision space.

Clearly, reporting is a delicate issue. If a neighbour reports somebody, however it pans out, there is the issue of living with that conflict. As a representative of the Highlands and Islands, I know that a lot of amazing things are happening there, but I come across quite a bit of conflict among communities. It is heartbreaking that people have to live in that situation.

I have been thinking about that issue. Maybe this is not for the bill, but I feel that we need something—I would call it a soft infrastructure—to provide support and funding for people. Some of you might know about the Common Ground Forum, which is working well in the deer management space. We need something to recognise that conflict could happen in the crofting setting. We need to be proactive, recognise that and fund people who have the skills to manage conflict and to help people move through it. People might have a conflict, but they do not have to live with it for ever. When people come to the table and start talking to each other, that can help them to move on.

I feel that we need something, although that is not necessarily for the bill. At our previous evidence session on the bill, somebody used the word “clyping”. I loved Josh Doble’s point that it is in the public interest that crofting is working well. We maybe need to help people better than we are doing in the rural space. What are your thoughts on that?

My questions are about part 2, which concerns the merger of the Scottish Land Court and the Lands Tribunal for Scotland. I see from the papers that most people are content with the idea from the point of view of streamlining and efficiencies. I am happy for people to come in and say more about that if they want to.

However, I have a particular interest in the potential, which is mentioned by Josh Doble in his submission, to extend

“the jurisdiction of Scottish Land Court to cover environmental rights, including litigation concerning contraventions of environmental laws, statutory and common law”

and

“nuisance and planning matters.”

Dr Doble, could you expand on the opportunity to establish an environmental court in Scotland?

Josh, I want to come back to your point about the wording of “environmental use” and what people have said in general. You may not be across it, but the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill is going through the Parliament. Have you thought about the connection between what might need to be said in the crofting bill and the natural environment bill?

Anyone else? No. Maybe Steven Heddle covered it well enough.

Could you clarify what you mean when you say that one of the things that you are looking for in the power of general competence is the ability to create revenue raising streams at a local level so that local authorities can choose what funding they might bring in through a revenue stream?

I will move us on to the issue of a general power of competence for Scottish local government, which we asked members of the previous panel about. They were keen to say that they remain committed to pursuing the concept, and they talked about the potential opportunities that they might have in emerging areas such as green energy if they had such a general power of competence.

I recognise that the Scottish Government ran a consultation on the subject, which has concluded, but everyone who represents local government, including COSLA, is still keen to see progress being made in that space. What are your thoughts on that?

Thanks for that. It was a good point and good to hear the illustrations in your own local authority. We go back to Meghan.

It is good to get that clarity. I certainly take your point from earlier that you are looking for a gearing effect in order to make local authorities aware of the opportunity that is before them.

I will bring in Evelyn Tweed now.

Again before the summer, we reached a point in the committee where we realised that, if we want some change, it will need to be started on early doors in session 7. I take your point that the revenue neutral approach is about fairness, which is what was managed in Wales. If it can be achieved in Wales, I would hope that we could reach that point here in Scotland.

I believe Meghan Gallacher might want a supplementary on this question.

Can I clarify something? You said that reform would not be likely to happen within a decade. Is that within this decade or within 10 years?