Seòmar agus comataidhean

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.

Again, owing to my not being the planning minister, I will hand over to Simon initially for a view on that. If there is anything that I can add, I will do so.

It is not necessarily directly linked with the land fund, but community bodies can approach our community right to buy team for guidance on navigating land reform legislation.

Yes. Perhaps James Hamilton wants to come in on that. What I was trying to say at the beginning of the meeting, convener, is largely what you described there. I would not want to say that the strategy sits underneath the plan; rather, it is part of it, as a reflection of the fact that local growing is part of our plans for a good food nation, of which there are other facets.

I echo your initial comments—I, too, have had the opportunity to meet folks who either have started or are involved in long-running community-growing organisations. I have met more groups that have done that under the land reform legislation and with the support of the Scottish land fund than groups that have done so under the statutory allotment work. That is probably something for me to reflect on in this context. They are some of the most enthusiastic and excellent groups that I have had the pleasure of meeting.

I have viewed what the committee said on the national partnership forum and your comments on the tripartite group and its remit. I am keen that that remains a tight group with SG, local authorities and SAGS. I always forget what that stands for, but I think that it is the Scottish association of growing—

Thank you for inviting my colleagues and me today. Thanks also for your time spent looking at this important matter. I very much welcome the work that the committee has done and the recommendations that you have produced. I take them all on board.

I say that because local growing is very important to the Scottish Government. Part 9 of the 2015 act demonstrates the importance that we place on allotments as part of the wider picture of community growing. I mention the wider picture because I am glad that your investigation looked at the non-statutory growing environment, as well as allotments. I am absolutely committed to and convinced of the multiple benefits of community growing, and you set out a number of those benefits in your report. They include benefits for physical and mental health, social cohesion and biodiversity, as well as reduction of our carbon footprint and tackling loneliness and isolation. Among the benefits, you also included ageing well or healthily, which is really important. I believe in those co-benefits, and I believe that everyone in Scotland should be able to access them. A lot of the work that we are doing here will help us to progress that.

We have recently been living through a period of disruption. In many ways, that has served only to make the co-benefits much more important. We know that people turned to their natural environment as they took solace during some of the darkest days of the pandemic. When we were able to unlock, people sought cohesion and coming together after lockdown. Of course, the disruption has created a period of difficulty for governance, implementation and delivery, both locally and nationally. When part 9 was considered and passed, none of us could have foreseen the events that would follow.

Finally, I will make two points about delivery. First, the Scottish Government clearly has responsibilities under part 9 of the 2015 act. Those have been fulfilled by the letter of the legislation. The vast majority of the responsibilities lie with local authorities, which are best placed to make decisions based on their local demography, geography and resource. I want the Scottish Government to be a helpful broker of progress on that, but I do not want to impinge on local decision making. The second point about delivery is a practical one. I flag the point that we cannot escape the very difficult financial restrictions that local and national Government face just now, but I hope that, despite that, with the good work of the committee, which I want to take away and take on board, we can make progress in the months and years to come.

I hear two different concerns when I speak to groups across the piece. One is that they cannot get new funding, and the other is that new funding appears to be all that is available. There are concerns on both sides. I know that community and third sector organisations are calling out for reliability of funding and the ability to plan ahead that comes with multiyear funds. Of course, the Scottish Government has to work on an annual basis, and we are doing so in volatile economic circumstances just now.

As with much of this, I am absolutely prepared to consider how we can strive for more stable multiyear funding patterns, because I know how that allows groups to plan. The fairer funding practice should be adopted as far as practically possible. I will certainly aim for that.

That is a good question. Obviously, the act is wide-ranging, and you will know that my colleague Tom Arthur, in his ministerial role, is undertaking a review of the act, which was a commitment. A lot of work on part 9 had already started in advance of the commissioning of Tom Arthur’s review. We meet regularly; in fact, just last week, we had a cross-ministerial meeting on food that included the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and Islands and colleagues from local government. It is certainly my intention to meet Tom Arthur specifically to discuss the recommendations of your report and our reply, so that that can, as far as possible, be built into his review.

We always want to learn from neighbours far away and closer about how they manage such things, and I was interested in the evidence that the committee took from Wales. Since your report was published, Scottish Government officials have met their counterparts in the Welsh Government to discuss its commitments and how they think those are going. We absolutely will seek to learn from what they have done, and I will watch closely to see how achievable the doubling is and how the funding has worked in that regard.

That is an interesting question. My experience so far is that a number of groups have either formally used land reform legislation to acquire land for purposes including growing, or they have been able to enter into a negotiated sale because landowners now realise that a suite of legislation requires that and it has that signalling effect. Of course, that is supported by the Scottish land fund.

Prior notice to communities is important because it can be an onerous task to not just constitute an appropriate body under land reform legislation but to buy and take on the land. The longer communities have to prepare for that task, the more able they will be to take it right through to purchasing and managing the land. For me, the real value of prenotification is in giving time for communities to prepare to navigate a sale and to plan how the land will be managed thereafter. That is already helpful in the community growing space.