Amendment 310, in the name of Ariane Burgess, is grouped with amendments 339, 342, 348, 427, 433, 150, 151, 158, 174 to 174B, 364, 459 and 460. Ariane Burgess is at another committee meeting, so Mark Ruskell is going to speak to and move amendment 310, and speak to the other amendments, on her behalf.

I call the deputy convener, Michael Matheson, to speak to amendment 150. I will refer to you as “deputy convener” only once—you will get to speak lots of times, but we all know who you are.

Do you wish to press or seek to withdraw amendment 310?

I thank the member for that. Just for clarity, I should say that, in relation to the accessibility of land management plans, Forestry and Land Scotland probably provides a perfect example when we talk about having a website where you can go straight to a map and find out what is happening in a particular area and when all the felling is going to happen. If you can find that, please tell me where it is, because I cannot. I just think that this could grow arms and legs and become incredibly expensive, and I would like to know more about those issues before I can support the amendment.

My other slight amusement relates to the amendments lodged by Ariane Burgess. The member can correct me if I am wrong, but I think that one of those amendments provides that the purchaser of an estate will have to adopt the plan of the previous owner. That made me smile, because if that were the case, it would mean that the Scottish Government would be letting grouse shooting happen at Glen Prosen.

Is that what you intend, Ariane? It might well be that a purchaser adopting the plan of the previous owner is not what you intended. Do you want to intervene?

The next item of business is stage 2 of the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill, which is consideration of amendments. I welcome the non-committee members who are here today. This is our first stage 2 meeting on the bill. At the moment, the deadline for lodging amendments is 27 June, but more than 516 amendments have already been lodged, which will require some consideration.

Before we go into the detail of the amendments, I remind members, as I always do at the start of stage 2 considerations in this committee, that I have an interest in a farming partnership in Moray, as set out clearly in my entry in the register of members’ interests. Specifically, I declare an interest as the owner of approximately 500 acres—for those of you who want to know the conversion, it is 202 hectares—of farmland, of which 50 acres, or just over 20 hectares, is woodland.

I also declare that I am a tenant of approximately 500 acres, or approximately 202 hectares, in Moray under a non-agricultural tenancy, and that I have another farming tenancy under the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 1991. I also take on grass lets on an annual basis, should I need to.

It is hard to predict how much progress the committee will make today, but I can say with some confidence that I do not expect us to get past section 6 today. I am looking to stop the stage 2 consideration at around 12.30, so that we have time to consider our work programme.

As this is our first stage 2 meeting on the bill, I will recap the process. Committee members should have before them the bill, the marshalled list and the groupings. For those of you who are watching online, those documents are available on the Scottish Parliament’s bill web page.

I will call each amendment in the order that it appears on the marshalled list. The member who lodged the amendment should either move it or say “not moved” when it is called. If that member does not move the amendment, any other member present may do so. The groupings document sets out the amendments in the order in which they will be debated. There will be one debate on each group of amendments. The member who lodged the first amendment in the group will be called to speak to and move the amendment and to speak to any other amendments in the group. I will then call other members who have amendments in the group to speak to, but not to move, their amendments and to speak to the other amendments in the group, if they wish.

I will then call any other members who wish to speak in the debate. If you wish to speak, indicate that to me or to the clerk to make sure that I bring you in. I will then call the cabinet secretary to speak, if she has not already spoken in the debate. Finally, I will call the member who moved the first amendment in the group to wind up and to press or withdraw the amendment. If a member wishes to withdraw an amendment after it has been moved and debated, I will ask whether any member present objects. If there is an objection, I will put the question on the amendment. Later amendments in the group are not debated again when they are reached in the marshalled list. If they are moved, I will put the question on them straight away.

Only committee members may vote in a division, and, because this is a hybrid meeting, voting will be done by roll call. We hope that we will get a result there and then, if the figures tally. If they do not tally, we will do the roll call again until they do—but they will.

That is how it works. There is a huge briefing pack, which is just for today—there is a lot more to come.

Before section 1

I do not think that people who are receiving payments under the farm payments schemes are necessarily receiving them for delivering community good. They are receiving them to cover requirements of regulations, such as those that relate to passports for animals, livestock density, the stocking rate and the use of fertiliser and when it can be used on land. Those are the sorts of things that people receive payments for. However, the suggestion in the amendments is that we go way beyond that with the public interest. It gives me some concern that we would put burdens on people who would not be rewarded.

I listened carefully to what was said on the amendment in the name of Mercedes Villalba on tax residency. I am not sure that I understand where someone would have to reside for tax purposes in order to own more than a certain amount of land—would it be Scotland or the United Kingdom? There are two different tax rates and, indeed, different tax codes to show whether someone is resident in Scotland or the United Kingdom. I am not sure that the amendment is competent because I do not understand that point.

The result of the division is: For 2, Against 5, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 310 disagreed to.

Section 1—Community-engagement obligations in relation to large land holding

I call Tim Eagle to speak to amendment 427 and other amendments in the group.

Does anyone else have any comments?

My only comment is that there are 27 areas listed on the instrument where parking would be limited. I come from the Highlands, and I struggle to understand where they all are. I think that it would have been much easier if a map had been produced with the SSI so that we did not have to try to work out where each of the 27 areas is. I would ask that, in future, the clerks make sure that a small map is produced to ensure that we can understand where the areas are, especially when there are 27 of them.

The committee has agreed that it has no comments on whether the order should go into force. Do we agree to write to Highland Council regarding enforcement?

Members indicated agreement.

I call Ariane Burgess to speak to amendment 3 and other amendments in the group.