Proposed Land Ownership and Public Interest Bill: Consultation
Read the consultation document for the proposal here
Question 1: Which of the following best describes your view of the proposal’s aim to reduce the concentration of land ownership in Scotland?
Fully Supportive
Partially supportive
Neutral
Partially opposed
Fully Opposed
Unsure
RTPI Scotland fully supports the proposals to reduce the concentration of land ownership in Scotland. There is evidence to suggest that Scotland’s concentrated pattern of land ownership is adversely impacting on communities’ economic, social and environmental wellbeing, and also on the provision of housing to meet local community needs. Tackling the concentration of land ownership in Scotland is crucial to further empowering communities in exercising their rights to buy land and has the potential to help achieve Community Wealth Building (CWB). CWB is an approach to economic development that has been adopted by the Scottish Government to “tackle long standing systemic challenges and structural inequalities within our communities…[and] to transform our local and regional economic systems to enable more local communities and people to own, have a stake in, access and benefit from the wealth our economy generates”. The use and ownership of land is critical to shaping how we live, work, recreate, as well as the quality of these experiences. We believe the proposals outlined in the consultation document align with the Scottish Government’s commitment to CWB and also to the purpose of planning introduced by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019: “to manage the development and use of land in the long term public interest”.
In addition to the above, we also believe that the proposals outlined in the consultation document have the potential to contribute positively to the operationalisation of the Place Principle, which was adopted by the Scottish Government and COSLA to help overcome organisational and sectoral boundaries. The Principle “promotes a shared understanding of place, and the need to take a more collaborative approach to a place’s services and assets to achieve better outcomes for people and communities”. The Place Standard and the Place and Wellbeing Outcomes are valuable tools to help people think about the quality of their place and where action might be required. There is evidence to suggest that concentrated land ownership patterns in Scotland are impinging on the ability of communities to effectively participate in land use and management decision-making processes. The mechanisms proposed in this consultation document have the potential to address this and to contribute towards the collaborative, place-based approach to services, assets and investments which are a key aim of the Place Principle. Given the important contribution that this Bill could make towards operationalising the Place Principle, it is disappointing that the consultation document makes no reference to the Principle. RTPI Scotland has long believed that for the Place Principle to be effective, there is a need to operationalise its work so that it influences policy, practice and investment on the ground. This could be done by embedding the Place Principle into the key purpose and functions of the regulatory body appointed under this Bill, to ensure that all actions undertaken by it (i.e. application of the Public Interest Test, facilitating voluntary arrangements etc.) are done in accordance with the Place Principle to drive forward its aims.
Question 2: Which of the following best describes your view of the presumed limit on the amount of land that can be sold or transferred, or that any person can own
Fully Supportive
Partially supportive
Neutral
Partially opposed
Fully Opposed
Unsure
For the reason set out under Q1, RTPI Scotland fully supports the proposal to introduce a presumed limit on the amount of land that can be sold or transferred, or that any person can own.
Question 3: If there is to be such a presumed limit, which of the following best describes your view on setting this limit at 500 hectares?
The limit should be higher than 500 hectares
500 hectares is about right
The limit should be lower than 500 hectares
The limit should be different, in different circumstances
Unsure
The proposal to set the presumed limit at 500 hectares appears to be reasonable having regard to the justifications set out in the consultation document. We would need to examine all available evidence to comment further. The proposal to apply this limit to in aggregate land holdings as well as single land-holdings, may go a little way to addressing land reform in the urban as well as in the rural context.
Although we understand that there could be justification for applying different presumed limits in different circumstances, we believe this could become overly complex and onerous to manage and enforce by the appointed regulatory body. Without a clear and transparent system in place, the intended impact of the proposals could be unintentionally reduced or watered down.
Question 4: Which of the following best describes your view of having a statutory regulator with powers to subject proposed sales of land that are over the presumed limit to a public interest test?
Fully Supportive
Partially supportive
Neutral
Partially opposed
Fully Opposed
Unsure
RTPI Scotland believes that appointing a regulatory body with powers to subject proposed sales of land that are over the presumed limit to a public interest test will be critical to ensure the intentions of this Bill are fully realised.
As previously stated, RTPI Scotland believes that the Place Principle should be embedded within the key purpose and functions of the regulatory body appointed under this Bill, to ensure that all actions undertaken by it (i.e. application of the Public Interest Test, facilitating voluntary arrangements etc.) are done in accordance with the Place Principle to drive forward its aims.
Question 5: Do you agree that the Scottish Land Commission is the appropriate body to be given this regulatory role?
Yes
No – because a different body should be given this role (please specify below)
No – because no body should be given this role
Unsure
As stated at Q4, RTPI Scotland fully supports the appointment of a regulatory body to enforce the intentions of this Bill. The justification set out in the consultation document for appointing this role to the Scottish Land Commission appears reasonable and we would have no particular objection.
We agree that placing this additional responsibility on local authorities would be inappropriate and would constitute a significant challenge at a time when they are already experiencing resourcing pressures. We do, however, support the proposal in the consultation document to give local authorities statutory rights of consultation in the appointed body's regulatory work.
Question 6: Do you have any comments on the proposed public interest test criteria (set out in the annex of the consultation document)?
As enshrined in the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 planning now has a defined statutory purpose - “to manage the development and use of land in the long term public interest”. Therefore, RTPI Scotland strongly supports a public interest led test being applied to transactions over the presumed limit. Such a test would help ensure communities are better considered when scrutinising land transactions which could result in significant land use change.
In order to effectively test for the public transaction of large-scale land holdings RTPI Scotland believes that the test needs to be applied to both the seller and buyer. By including the seller in considerations, an understanding could be developed on the existing public interest value of large land holdings, to get a clearer indication of what changes may arise. This could, for example, highlight whether an existing land holding has previously been subject to a statutory Land Rights and Responsibilities Review, which would highlight existing concerns over the extent to which land holdings are operating in the public interest.
Whilst we believe the criteria set out in the consultation document captures many of the interests that we would consider critical to assessing public interest, it will be important to ensure that such a test aligns with the planning system, particularly having regard to the policies of NPF4, and emerging Local Place Plans (LPPs), Local Development Plans (LDPs) and Regional Spatial Strategies (RSSs). LPPs in particular provide communities with an opportunity to develop proposals for the development and use of land and are required to be taken into consideration by local planning authorities in the preparation of LDPs. In addition, The Place Standard and the Place and Wellbeing Outcomes are valuable tools to help communities think about the quality of their place and where action might be required in preparing their LPPs. LPPs therefore represent an important mechanism in the planning system for empowering local communities in accordance with the Place Principle. They should therefore, together with LDPs and RSSs and the policies of NPF4, be taken into consideration as part of any public interest test to ensure that the sale or transfer of land that exceeds the presumed limit has proper regard to communities’ and local authorities’ aspirations set out in these plans.
Question 7: Which of the following best describes your views on the proposed voluntary arrangements (in Section 3E of the consultation document) which would assist those seeking not sell or transfer land over the presumed limit, to comply with the public interest test?
Fully Supportive
Partially supportive
Neutral
Partially opposed
Fully Opposed
Unsure
RTPI Scotland fully supports the proposals to engage early with sellers to agree voluntary arrangements to secure the public interest. Undertaking discussions early in the process, in collaboration with the seller, will help to ensure the best outcome is achieved as early as possible in the best interests of the community. Such discussions should have regard to the public interest criteria set out in the consultation document, but amended to include consideration of NPF4, LPPs, LDPs and RSSs.
Question 8: Which of the following best describes your views on the proposed powers that would allow the regulatory body to apply a public interest test to existing land holdings above the presumed limit, and give it options for intervention (see section 4A of the consultation document)?
Fully Supportive
Partially supportive
Neutral
Partially opposed
Fully Opposed
Unsure
RTPI Scotland fully supports the proposed powers that would allow the regulatory body to apply a public interest test to existing land holdings above the presumed limit and give it options for intervention. This would help ensure that established land is working in the public interest without having to wait for an application for permission to purchase to trigger such an assessment. Such powers could result in agreements being put in place for the future management and ownership of the land in accordance with the Place Principle, including a requirement for the owner to produce a land management plan. Such plans should be required to align with the planning system by ensuring they have regard to existing and emerging LPPs, LDPs, and RSSs, as well as the policy objectives of NPF4.
Question 9: Which of the following best describes your views on making any sale or transfer of the whole or greater part of an island (or, possible, a remote peninsula) subject to the public interest test (see Section 5 of the consultation document)?
Fully Supportive
Partially supportive
Neutral
Partially opposed
Fully Opposed
Unsure
No further comment
Question 10: Which of the following best describes your view of the proposed policies on non-domestic rates and valuation (see pages 27 and 28 of the consultation document)?
Fully Supportive
Partially supportive
Neutral
Partially opposed
Fully Opposed
Unsure
No further comment
Question 11: Any new law can have a financial impact which would affect individuals, businesses, the public sector, or others. What financial impact do you think this proposal could have if it became law?
A significant increase in costs
Some increase in costs
No overall change in costs
Some reduction in costs
A significant reduction in costs
Unsure
We appreciate that the proposals set out in the consultation document may result in extra costs being incurred on the appointed regulatory body, the Scottish Land Court, and to local authorities and landowners. We await with interest the Financial Memorandum that will accompany the introduction of the Bill in order to comment further.
Question 12: Any new law can have an impact on different individuals in society, for example as a result of their age, disability, gender re-assignment, marriage and civil partnership status, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex or sexual orientation. What impact could this proposal have on particular people if it became law? If you do not have a view skip to next question. Please explain the reasons for your answer and if there are any ways you think the proposal could avoid negative impacts on particular people?
No further comment
Question 13: Any new law can impact on work to protect and enhance the environment, achieve a sustainable economy, and create a strong, healthy, and just society for future generations. Do you think the proposal could impact in any of these areas? If you do not have a view then skip to next question. Please explain the reasons for your answer, including what you think the impact of the proposal could be, and if there are any ways you think the proposal could avoid negative impacts?
There is much evidence to suggest that Scotland’s concentrated pattern of land ownership is adversely impacting on communities’ economic, social and environmental wellbeing, and also on the provision of housing to meet local community needs in an equitable and inclusive manner. Tackling the concentration of land ownership in Scotland is crucial to further empowering communities in exercising their rights to buy land and has the potential to help achieve Community Wealth Building (CWB) and the Place Principle. As per our response to Q1, it is disappointing that the consultation document makes no reference to the Place Principle. RTPI Scotland has long believed that for the Place Principle to be effective, there is a need to operationalise its work so that it influences policy, practice and investment on the ground. This could be done by embedding the Place Principle into the key purpose and functions of the regulatory body appointed under this Bill, to ensure that all actions undertaken by it (i.e. application of the Public Interest Test, facilitating voluntary arrangements etc.) are done in accordance with the Place Principle to drive forward its aims.
RTPI Scotland believes that the proposals set out in the consultation document have the potential to have positive economic, social and environmental impacts in line with the Place Principle. However, it is vital that the proposals align fully with the planning system, including the principles and policies of NPF4, and the LDPs, LPPs, and RSSs. This alignment could be achieved by ensuring that NPF4, LDPs, LPPs and RSSs are fully considered as part of the public interest test criteria, and also within any land management plans which landowners will be required to prepare.
Question 14: Do you have any other additional comments or suggestions on the proposed Bill (which have not already been covered in any of your responses to earlier questions)?
No additional comments
