Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

Radical land reforms proposed in review group report

Ensuring subsidy support only goes to active farmers will be a real challenge for government
Ensuring subsidy support only goes to active farmers will be a real challenge for government

The Land Reform Review Group final report released last week is unlikely to be criticised for not being radical enough.

Chaired by former Church of Scotland moderator Alison Elliot it contains recommendations, which, were they to be taken up by the Scottish Government, would lead to some major changes including a limit on the acreage owned by any one individual or business entity.

Much of the thrust of the report can be deciphered from its title, Land of Scotland and the Common Good.

Community ownership is encouraged with the target of 1million acres of urban and rural land under such management by 2020 endorsed. Public funds should be made available to help community land purchase and there should be plenty of government support in terms of advice.

This review should not be confused with the work of the agricultural land holdings legislation review group which is still in the consultation phase. There is some overlap, however, with Ms Elliot’s group taking some views on tenancy matters.

The requirements for tenants to register to have a pre-emptive right to buy is seen as an unnecessary constraint.

The question of the more radical absolute right to buy is somewhat tempered by a suggestion that consideration is given to the concept of “conditional right to buy”.

The creation of a Scottish Land and Property Commission is proposed as is further development of the Scottish Government’s land use strategy which should, says the report, look at ways of reducing rural landowners’ choices over how they use their land.

The 260-page report contains 62 recommendations in all including a proposal that the exemption of non-domestic rates enjoyed by farm buildings and land should end. The government is encouraged to consider land value taxation.

NFU Scotland was quick to respond, however, claiming that the Scottish Government had already rejected the idea of rating farmland and buildings.

Scottish Land and Estates, which represents landowners throughout Scotland, said the report appeared to be based on a bias against private landownership and made “a series of unfounded recommendations that will create more publicly funded bodies, increase bureaucracy and place an even heavier burden on the public purse”.

SLE chief executive Douglas McAdam said: “This report is extremely disappointing in that it does not reflect the very substantial social, economic and environmental contribution made to Scotland by private landownership of all scales – something that successive Scottish administrations have recognised.

“The majority of the recommendations in this report will also affect people in Scotland who only own one property or a small area of land or river. It is not just farmers and estates who will have concerns – all owners of property and land across Scotland including urban areas will be affected by these proposals. Continual references to a concentrated land ownership pattern do not take account of the fact that tens of thousands of people own rural Scotland.”

Christopher Nicholson, chairman of the Scottish Tenant Farmers Association, said: “The recommendations on the existing tenants’ right to buy are commonsense.

“The requirement to register an interest in to trigger a pre-emptive right to buy is unnecessary and has already deterred a number of tenants from registration and the requirement to re-register will account for many lapsed registrations.

“Tenant farmers widely support a conditional right to buy and we welcome the review group’s endorsement, and look forward to seeing how it can be applied in the public interest.”