Chamber and committees

The passport is due to be rolled out later this month, but offshore trade unions—in particular, the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers—remain concerned that their members will end up continuing to pay a price if their qualifications are not recognised by developers and contractors in the offshore wind sector. Will the minister guarantee that all developers of wind farms that are leased through ScotWind will be required to recognise the passport? Will he commit to working with the trade unions on implementing the passport when it is finally launched?

The status quo in Scotland’s waters is not working. Last week, the Court of Session ruled that ministers unlawfully ignored the national marine plan when deciding on fishing licence policies and, after today’s statement, it is clear that we are still no closer to a coherent marine spatial planning process. In the meantime, our waters and everyone and everything that relies on them are being squeezed. Can the minister confirm whether the Scottish Government is committed to creating a cohesive spatial plan for our seas in this parliamentary session?

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My app would not connect. I would have voted yes.

I begin by thanking all the members who signed my motion, which allowed it to be debated today. It is no surprise that not a single Tory MSP signed the motion, so it will come as no surprise to them that I will not be taking interventions from the landed Tory gentry on those benches.

It could not be a more important time for Parliament to have this debate. The high concentration of so much land in the hands of so few is central to the inequality that has blighted Scotland for centuries. Land, and who owns it, are at the heart of the crises that we face. From food security and climate resilience to housing and energy, land ownership shapes modern Scotland, as it has done for centuries. To tackle those crises, we must tackle the injustice of current land ownership.

Since devolution, there has been much talk about tackling the high concentration of land ownership, but there has been far too little progress. Although Scotland officially abolished feudal tenure in 2000, the system of land tenure is still overwhelmingly feudal in nature. In many communities, the relationship of landholder and tenant remains deeply unequal.

In 2013, it was reported that just 432 landowners own half of all Scotland’s privately owned land and, since then, there has been no indication of any significant change, because Scotland’s land market is almost completely unregulated. Provided that their bank balance is big enough, anyone can buy whatever land they want with no questions asked. A multibillionaire has become Scotland’s largest landowner in around a decade, buying estate after estate with no barriers.

In fact, ownership of Scotland’s land is so concentrated that the Scottish Land Commission likens the situation to monopolies in banking, supermarkets and energy, except those industries are all subject to legal regulation to prevent monopolies, whereas land ownership is not. While many of our constituents struggle to cover the basics such as food, housing and energy, a small number of individuals are free to buy up more land than they could possibly ever need, denying the public our fair share. However, it does not have to be this way—inequality is not inevitable. Land is a public good and a precious natural resource, and it can and should serve our common interest.

That is why I am currently consulting on a proposed member’s bill to address the centuries-old concentrated pattern of land ownership in Scotland in order to strengthen the regulation of Scotland’s land market, subject large landholdings to a public-interest test and, yes, to introduce a presumed limit of 500 hectares on the amount of land that any person can own.??The 3,000 hectare limit that the Scottish Government proposes—equivalent to 30 square kilometres—is so vast and would affect so few landowners that it would do little to address the issue.

I am not alone in that view. The Scottish Government’s recent consultation analysis found that most respondents who suggested an alternative threshold called for a lower figure. I hope, therefore, that, in responding to today’s debate, the minister will update us on the Scottish Government’s thinking around that threshold.

More than 20 years after devolution, our landlords still lag far behind those of other European countries when it comes to protecting that public interest. That is why we need a community-informed public interest test—a test that would consider whether it is in the public interest for a landholding to remain at such a large scale, and a test that accounts for the public interest in sustainable food, affordable housing, climate resilience and energy security. For too long, the public interest has been ignored, communities have been sidelined and the environment has been trashed.

The issue of land reform has dogged Scottish politics for decades. We have had years of discussing and debating, of consulting and reviewing, but now is the time to act. Now is the time to redress the balance. Now is the time to put the public interest first. Now is the time for land justice. So, I urge everyone who hears this to complete the consultation, to share it as widely as possible and to join the movement for land justice. I am proud to move the motion in my name.

Will the member take an intervention?

The Bute house agreement also refers to applying a public interest test to transfers of large-scale landholdings, but very few large landholdings are transferred in Scotland each year. Does the minister agree that waiting for all large landholdings to be transferred will take decades and that we need a public interest test that applies to existing holdings?

The largest source of Scottish greenhouse gas emissions is again domestic transport, so it is welcome that, last summer, the Scottish Government finally released new powers under the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 to enable new publicly owned bus companies to be established for the first time since Tory bus deregulation in 1986. Transport emissions will not change unless we change who owns our public transport.

However, as Friends of the Earth Scotland has highlighted, new powers without funding are in essence worthless. In Greater Manchester—

—it is estimated that the total cost of franchising is £135 million. The Scottish Government’s community bus fund is just £1 million—

Will the cabinet secretary be honest about her intentions? Does she want our buses to be brought back into public ownership? If so, what funding will she add to the community bus fund?

Last June, the Scottish Government announced that it would invest in a pilot programme with Aberdeenshire Council to bring more properties on to mains water supplies. Around 50,000 properties are served by private supplies, often in remote and rural communities, which are more vulnerable to water shortages year on year. Will the cabinet secretary share the progress that has been made on the Aberdeenshire pilot? How many of those 50,000 has the pilot brought on to mains supply since last June?