Seòmar agus comataidhean

Why will you not go back and reassess current permit holders? You said earlier that, throughout the lifetime of the authorisation, you will continue to check whether a person is fit and proper.

Let me be helpful here. I am quite sure that SEPA, and certainly the public, would not want to see two regimes: one for those folks who have received permission under the new framework, and another for those folks with existing permits. That would be fair to say, would it not?

I think that this is a very easy question but, to be honest, you are complicating the answer. I get the point about transition and all the rest of it, but there is a simple question. We want to know that this will not lead to two regimes, whereby those folks who apply under the new framework are under a different regime from those folks who have current permits.

You will transition to ensure that everybody is deemed to be a fit and proper person.

I understand the targeting aspect, but you said earlier that this change will ensure that, throughout the lifetime of a permission, you will check whether somebody is fit and proper. Why would you not go back and check current permit holders—obviously, targeting those who are non-compliant first—if you intend the change to involve continuous consideration of whether somebody is fit and proper under the new regime?

So it would be a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

You have tripped over one in 36 years—okay. Thank you very much, convener.

I get the transition point, but what you do not want to see, as you progress with the new power, is that there are, or are even seen to be, two regimes. Would it be fair to say that?

Good morning to the panel members. We heard from crofting stakeholders last week. The Scottish Crofting Federation feels that small landholdings should be converted to crofts. What is your opinion of that? Would you like to see an expansion of the crofting counties? Martin Hall caught my eye first.

So—

I will come to all that, convener.