Seòmar agus comataidhean

Amendments 138, 139 and 168 are consequential to earlier amendments on sites of community significance that I did not move.

Amendment 181 relates to amendment 178, which was considered earlier, and to the fact that, with the creation of the Scottish land and communities commissioner, there is an opportunity for us to consider expanding the role and functions of the Scottish Land Commission.

Amendment 181 seeks to require the commission to have regard to four key additional areas:

“the contribution of land to the achievement of a just transition to net zero”;

“the relationship between scale of land holdings to the building of community wealth”;

“the desirability of achieving a more diverse pattern of land ownership”;

and

“measures to support the repopulation of land and the sustainability of communities.”

I am conscious that the Scottish Land Commission may have regard to those areas at present, but there is nothing in legislation that requires it to do so. Amendment 181 is a probing amendment to seek clarity from the Government on the role that it sees the Scottish Land Commission having in helping to address what are pressing public issues and the role that land can play in addressing them.

I move amendment 181.

My amendments in the group relate to my earlier amendments on the issue of public interest. My amendments 152 and 153 seek to amend the 2003 act so that a lotting decision must not only specify what the lots will be but also

“provide a statement of reasons as to why Ministers consider the decision is in the public interest.”

That will provide greater transparency in the process.

My amendment 156 also relates to the issue of public interest. It would place a duty on ministers to issue guidance on how lotting decisions are to be made, including the circumstances in which ministers are to instruct the land and communities commissioner to carry out any initial review on their behalf.

My amendment 159 relates to lotting decisions and the requirement to make sure that ministers reference how that lotting decision is being undertaken. It relates to my amendment 158, which was previously discussed.

I am grateful to the cabinet secretary for her comments. I am conscious that the Scottish Land Commission already undertakes aspects of the work that is referred to in my amendment, although that is not in any legislation. On the basis that I will seek to explore the matter further ahead of stage 3, I seek to withdraw amendment 181.

Amendment 181, by agreement, withdrawn.

No.

He is just checking that we are paying attention.

On that point, convener, my reading of amendment 97 is that it would provide for exactly what you suggest, namely that someone could receive multiple consecutive enforcement notices that imposed a fine if the breach remained unremedied. Therefore, it would be perfectly within reason for those imposing the fine to start at a lower level and then to progress the fine to a higher level on the basis of multiple breaches, through enforcement. I think that amendment 97 makes provision for what you are looking for, but it sets the cap at £40,000.

My amendments in this group relate to my original amendments in group 3, which were to do with community significance. These amendments are consequential to those earlier amendments, so I will not be moving them.

On the figure of £40,000, it is important to reinforce the point that the fine could be up to £40,000, but that it could start off at £50, £500 or £5,000, for example. Are you arguing that the cap should be lowered from £40,000, and, if so, what should the cap be? The figure of £40,000 is not the amount of the fine, but a cap that you cannot go beyond, so there is a range from no fine to a fine of up to £40,000.

The principal purpose behind my amendments 178 and 181 is to help to clarify the way in which the land and communities commissioner will interact with the Scottish Land Commission. The powers that will be provided under this legislation by the new provisions very much rest on the individual who will hold the role as the land and communities commissioner, as opposed to the Scottish Land Commission itself. That will therefore make the process and the role dependent on the expertise, experience and knowledge that the individual commissioner would hold during their term in office.

The Government has sought to shape the role of the commissioner in a similar fashion to the way in which it shaped the tenant farming commissioner. However, a strength with the tenant farming commissioner has been the way in which the role has been driven by the individual postholder rather than the way in which the post has been designed and incorporated into the Scottish Land Commission.

I essentially lodged these amendments as probing amendments, to enable the Scottish Government to clarify how it intends to codify aspects of the process that will be progressed through the role of the land and communities commissioner and how that will be embedded in the Scottish Land Commission.

On amendment 181, I recognise that the regulatory function of the Scottish Land Commission will expand under the bill. There is an opportunity to update some of the issues on which the Scottish Land Commission may work, given its new, broader remit, and to consider how we can help to support it in its policy development work in those areas.

One aspect of amendment 178 is the way in which the Scottish land and communities commissioner would have to consult the Scottish Land Commission prior to issuing guidance. I am keen to understand why the Government does not feel that the new commissioner should have to engage with the commission prior to issuing guidance, given the close nature of the working relationship that they will have with each other. I am keen to hear the Scottish Government’s position on those matters in order to explore the issue further.