³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

I am confident about the measures that we are bringing forward. I know that a number of views were expressed when the committee took evidence. Again, we are considering all of that but, ultimately, this is about creating more fairness in the processes and provisions that we are introducing.

I completely appreciate and agree with your point, but we need to make sure that the proposals that we introduce are evidenced, so that they stand up to scrutiny. I am not averse to considering that point, but we would have to give greater thought to how that might work and what the evidence base for that might be. I understand the concerns that were raised in evidence in relation to that.

I have listened to the evidence on that. First of all, the land management plans and the local place plans have different aims, so they have different purposes. My concern is that local place plans are not universal. I think that a review is due to be undertaken this year—I am sure that Andy Proudfoot will correct me if I am wrong—in relation to how local place plans are operating. It makes sense for that to be considered through the land management process, but I would be reluctant to introduce that into the primary legislation. Given the different nature of the plans, perhaps that is more appropriately addressed in secondary legislation or guidance. However, it makes sense for there to be some consideration of that because local place plans are important in identifying the local communities’ needs.

Absolutely.

Different forms of guidance have already been published. For example, the Scottish Land Commission has guidance on what good community engagement looks like.

It is not for me to sit here at this time, without undertaking wider engagement and discussion, and say specifically what people will have to do. As I said, we have principles in place that have been published by the Scottish Land Commission that people can look at to see what can be expected.

Yes. Ultimately, we have to ensure that fines are proportionate, but we are keen to hear members’ views.

Do you want me to search for them and read them out? I would be happy to do that or to send them to the committee.

I cannot outline to you right now every piece of guidance from the Scottish Land Commission, but that information is publicly available, and I am happy to send you it. However, as ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ, we all know and have seen in our areas what good and bad community engagement looks like.

We want to make sure that the process is meaningful. To me, a meaningful process is about direct engagement with people. Bad engagement is when you put a form on a website and expect people to tick a box and, essentially, that is it. We want to make sure that the process is meaningful and that people feel that their voices have been listened to. There are good and bad examples of that, but we have guidance available. All this will be subject to further consultation to make sure that we are clear on what our expectations are.

That is a really important point. I would not want to highlight those areas of work and make it look as though everybody is working in silos, but I appreciate that it can look that way. In a minute, I will pass over to Andy Proudfoot, who can talk a bit more about the interconnectedness of the different issues.

You touched on compulsory purchase orders, and a significant piece of work on those is being undertaken by another team; a review group has been set up to tease out issues in relation to that. It is important that that is a stand-alone piece of work, but I note that it is being undertaken with a view to working across Government departments where there is crossover and where it will have an impact. We have a strong interest in that.

The community right to buy review is on-going at the moment. That right is available in urban areas just as it is in rural areas in Scotland. That piece of work is being taken forward separately from the bill because of the complexities that are involved. The bill will not change community right to buy, but the notification provisions will add another gateway in. That will not necessarily impact urban communities.

I return to the fact that we have based the bill on what were seen to be and considered to be the key issues where there was evidence of potential harm to communities because of the concentration of land ownership in Scotland. We are introducing measures in the bill to address what were seen to be the key issues at the time of the initial report from the Land Commission, but we need to have evidence to back up any proposals that we introduce. As I said earlier, the Land Commission said in its report that there was not necessarily the evidence to implement recommendations in relation to land reform in urban areas, but that that would be a consideration for future work. We always have to be careful that anything that we do does not have unintended consequences, and land reform issues in an urban environment can be quite different from those in rural Scotland.

I will hand over to Andy Proudfoot, who can say a bit more about the other work that is happening.