Seòmar agus comataidhean

Do you mean that people are less likely to be open about their true feelings regarding land management?

That is a good example of significance—that is, if there were housing need in a community, and 1 hectare of land was available to be turned from temporary accommodation to permanent housing.

One issue that was raised with us was whether moving a fence by a couple of metres, say, would be captured by the bill. Might that be deemed to be not significant to the community? Could such cases, under the definition, be left out of the provisions?

How should good practice be codified? Should it be in the legislation or in guidance, or should we expect that to evolve?

Jon Hollingdale, do you want to come in?

Jon Hollingdale, do you want to come in?

We have discussed sites of community significance. When Josh Doble mentioned that, I could not help thinking about the Taymouth castle estate. It is relatively small, but there is a huge amount of community interest in the assets, and other such examples have been mentioned in evidence. Is there a way in which we can define such things in the bill? It feels as though it is open to a lot of interpretation, but a way forward could be to say, “This is a hugely significant asset to the community, so aspects of the bill should apply”. I am tempted to go along that line, but I am interested in how we would define it. As with the definition of “community”, we could get into a bit of a grey area.

So that is reflected in planning legislation.

Okay. The committee has another question in relation to the minimum threshold for prohibiting and notifying land transfers—

I ask the panel to hold that thought. We will come back to it.

We have covered thresholds in some depth, convener, so I was going to move on from that.