Chamber and committees

The Scottish Land Commission recommended that a public interest test be applied to transfers, but the Government has chosen to go for a transfer test instead. Why do you think that it has taken that approach, and not a public interest one?

Yes, I have just a couple of things.

The Land Commission recommended a figure of 1,000 hectares. Do you think that the Land Commission got it right?

So you think that the Land Commission got it wrong.

Jon, is that your view?

I would be interested in seeing that. I take from what you are saying that it is important to have the principles of enforcement in statute, but the practical application is probably best dealt with in guidance.

Therefore, if SPT took something forward later in 2026 and the SSI had been annulled, we would be in the situation that ministers have set out, namely that the traffic commissioner would have established a panel but that we would have no control over how the panel operated because of the existing arrangements in primary legislation. Is that correct?

Get Glasgow Moving is saying that, even if you oppose the idea of a panel, given the timelines that SPT has set out, it would be better to take the SSI forward as an interim arrangement to allow it to make progress on the matter but with a view to the Government considering whether, in the future, there might be a more appropriate mechanism than the panel system set out in the legislation. Would the Government consider that, given the concerns about the panel?

I believe so. From the check that I have made, it published documents in 2023. That is its own timeline. On the basis of that timeline, and that evidence, that would mean that a decision on whether to go to a panel would have to be in place by the end of 2026. Is that correct?

The committee has received only limited evidence on the matter. Only one individual and two organisations have so far provided evidence, because the committee has had little time to pursue the issue. In the latter part of the evidence that we received from Get Glasgow Moving it referred to SPT’s own timeline for the Strathclyde regional bus strategy process, which is part of its review of the franchising model. It set out that

“its franchising proposals will not be ready for the full independent financial audit (to be followed by the statutory public consultation) until the end of 2025.”

It went on to say:

“This means that they will not be ready for final approval until later in 2026.”

It then explained:

“This gives a window of at least a year for the necessary legislative changes to be made”.

Does that timeline for SPT seeking to take the matter to a panel sound right, given the evidence that we have received?

However, that legislative change would not happen before the end of 2026.