Seòmar agus comataidhean

And the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill?

Okay, fair enough. I have one more question on this. What does the Government consider might be a framework bill? When you are talking about these things, to what extent do you say that this is something that you want to co-design—to use the political phrasing—post, using a lot of secondary legislation? Can the Government be very specific about that? Is that talked about quite a lot behind the scenes?

I am very excited.

I look forward to our future discussions on that.

Okay—that is fine. I think that that covers all my questions.

Good morning, cabinet secretary. I want to ask about consultation. Concerns have been expressed that there is no statutory consultation requirement in the bill, but you have suggested that it comes under your general obligations as a Government. Why have you chosen that approach? After all, previous bills have contained an explicit statutory need to consult. Will you talk us through that?

Yes, but in previous bills, that aspect has been made explicit, whereas in this bill, we are talking about a general duty. Does this represent a change in approach in bills as we move forward?

I remind members that I am a small farmer and that I previously worked for Scottish Land & Estates. That is in my entry in the register of members’ interests, but I wanted to ensure that everyone is aware of that this morning.

Scottish Land & Estates has written to the committee with concerns about the consultation, saying that the bill contains aspects that could significantly affect not just some of its clients but the agricultural sector more broadly. I guess that this brings us back to your earlier point: you are absolutely right that we do not need full public consultation, but the bill should at least contain a guarantee to anybody who is going to be affected by any secondary legislation that the interested parties will be consulted. Are you averse to bringing forward such a provision at a later stage of the bill?

I have a quick question. I am still trying to get my head around a lot of this, because the problem, in relation to both the agriculture bill that you mentioned and this one, is that significant changes could happen—there is uncertainty around prohibition, modification of land, right to buy and so on. What happens in the background? Is there a set of requirements that you must consider for you to say, “Yes, that is balanced and we can take that power”? Do you have to follow a set of rules in order to come up with something that is balanced?

You have mentioned balance a lot but, from my point of view, I am not sure that the bill is balanced, because too much is left to secondary legislation that will not be appropriately scrutinised. Is there a flow chart that you must follow that can give you the assurance that, in your own minds, what you are proposing is balanced?