Bob Doris
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“I acknowledge the Scottish Government’s ambitious targets to reduce child poverty and the progress that has been made. I have heard that there will be a review of those targets, so it would be helpful to know whether the cabinet secretary believes that the targets have driven delivery in tackling child poverty.”
“They have driven focus and delivery, and have been an exceptionally important part of our armoury as we move forward with tackling child poverty in Scotland. We are seeing that difference being made.”
“Many bus users cannot take a single bus service to where they wish to go. Often, bus users will be required to change buses to reach their end destination. At times, four, as opposed to two, tickets will be required, with a change in the city centre or elsewhere to make the return journey that passengers require.”
“A few stops on a First Glasgow bus will cost £2.45, and it is only a few stops; most single journeys are £3.25. I therefore strongly welcome our Scottish Government’s commitment to a £2 cap price for bus fares in Glasgow. That will make a real difference in our city, but it needs to be carefully implemented.”
“After all, public money that is pumped into bus operators must be used for the public good. Indeed, it is anticipated that, in the current financial year, the budget to be invested in bus services is £528 million—I will say that again: £528 million— and £472.8 million for concessionary travel.”
“For balance, bus passengers, including me, do not tend to highlight when our bus services run well—and they do run well at times. There are occasions when buses are on time and the service is efficient and of high quality. We want to encourage more people to use buses, not fewer.”
The complete record
Every one of 432 lines we hold for Bob Doris, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 9.
“Colleagues elsewhere in the country may not champion the up to £80 million per year that the changes could cost. Let us be realistic about it: we do not have that money right now, but we have to find it. Patrick Harvie: Mr Doris makes some important points. I again make the case that the other changes that we need to make in the transport system for climate purposes, such as road pricing in whatever form it will take, need to be seen as a source of revenue for investment in public transport. Does Bob Doris also acknowledge the statistic that I referred to in my speech, which is that Lothian Buses, which is already in the public sector, returns revenue to the public purse?”
“Recently, I met First Glasgow to try to get it to reinstate a service through Kelvindale. It pointed out that running that service would not be economically viable—well, of course it is not. We have to look at the end-to-end journey in its entirety. If we break up a route into its component parts, no bus service will be economically viable, but it requires investment as a public service. That is what franchising and co-ordination are all about. We have to accept that it will cost money. We need to ensure that there is a common purpose in the Parliament, because there needs to be the collective political will to make that investment. We are talking about Glasgow and the greater Glasgow area, but there also needs to be political will across the country.”
“The 8 is a valued service but does not exist from Springburn on a Sunday, and it is far reduced at nights and weekends as it runs through Summerston. There is also the lack of a bus service through Kelvindale. I pick that example because it shows managed decline by bus companies. A few years ago, when First Glasgow decided to take out the Kelvindale part of the 4A service, which went from, I think, Broomhill through the west end and onwards through the city centre, Kelvindale was left without a bus service. Through the intervention of myself and others, SPT stepped in and the M4 service was put in place instead. Although it is far inferior, it is something. We championed that as a win, although it is not really a win—it is just that the situation is not as bad as it otherwise would have been.”
“I thank Patrick Harvie for bringing this important motion to the chamber. For the substantial Scottish Government investment that we make in Scotland’s bus services, we should be getting a far better city bus service in Glasgow. That is clear. Fares are too high and services are too sparse, particularly in the evenings, on Saturdays and—absolutely—on Sundays. Some places are bus deserts on a Sunday. However, we can do better. We need strategic investment in bus services. I believe that a franchising model, under powers given to local authorities and transport organisations from the Scottish Government, would do better. In Glasgow, that means co-ordination by SPT. What are the issues in Glasgow? Ruchill, in my constituency, barely has a service running through it. The 90 service is thin gruel, quite frankly.”
“Labour and the SNP are out of tune with the mood of this country, Scotland included. Until they confront reality, they will continue to betray the very people whom they claim to serve. 15:17”
“Our party leader, Kemi Badenoch, has said that Labour is gutting a deterrent without offering an alternative. They are both right. The bill is not a plan; it is a posture—a gesture to the leftist consensus that is comfortable with chaos. Yet, in this Parliament, we are asked to give consent. We recognise that this is largely—I would say wholly—a reserved matter. By convention, the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party respects the overall legislative authority of the UK Parliament in reserved areas. That is why, despite our trenchant opposition to the bill and everything that it represents, we will abstain on the motion. However, let there be no mistake—the Conservative Party remains the only party that is serious about restoring control, integrity and order to our borders.”
“Let us be honest—that is not lost on the Scottish people. Time and again, Scots have told pollsters and politicians that they share the concerns of the UK public at large. They are concerned about the pace of immigration and they are alarmed by illegal crossings. They understand that a country that cannot control its borders is a country that cannot control its future. What Labour and the SNP do not seem to grasp is that public consent for immigration depends on two things—that the system is fair and that the system is enforced. The Rwanda plan might not have been perfect, but it showed seriousness. It aimed to protect lives, shut down smugglers and restore order. Labour’s bill does none of those things. In the House of Commons debates, our colleague Chris Philp has rightly warned that the bill is a repeal bill, not a reform bill.”
“Members should make no mistake—this is costing the British taxpayer billions. It is costing more than £8 million a day to house illegal arrivals in hotels, many of which are in communities that are already stretched for housing and services. Who pays the price? Local families, rural businesses, tourism operators and hard-pressed councils. This is not compassion—it is collapse, and it is happening on Labour’s watch. Let us turn to the Scottish Government. The Scottish National Party has consistently refused to accept the reality of illegal immigration. Its attitude to border control is one of ideological fantasy—a completely open border with limitless immigration, legal and illegal alike. It talks about compassion, but its refusal to distinguish between legal migration and unlawful entry undermines public trust.”
“I wonder whether Stephen Kerr could say what the legal routes to seek refuge in the UK are. Stephen Kerr: These are people who are leaving the safety of France and putting their lives in the hands of ruthless human traffickers. That is what we have to stop. People are drowning in the Channel, and that cannot go on. Bob Doris might want to ask such questions, and I respect his right to do so, but the priority should be to stop the trade and the crossings. We have to send the right message, and Labour is sending the wrong message. It is sending the wrong message to the smugglers, the traffickers and those who are willing to put large sums of money in the hands of those criminals and risk their lives in dinghies crossing the Channel. Unfortunately, the message from Labour is that Britain is open again for illegal business.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on whether Police Scotland and other public bodies have appropriate powers to tackle the misuse of off-road vehicles and promote community safety. (S6O-04847)”
“A constituent of mine is a displaced Ukrainian national as a consequence of Putin’s illegal war. She is a researcher at the University of Glasgow whose post will end shortly. Her efforts to secure a new post are being hampered by the fact that her work visa expires in October next year. Although an extension has been applied for, she is currently losing out on job opportunities. She wishes certainty for her and her daughter, who is excelling at Cleveden secondary school. Will the First Minister get the Scottish Government to contact the Home Office to ensure that my constituent and other displaced Ukrainian nationals in Scotland can obtain the certainty that they need to continue to live and work here?”
“Secondly, much has been made of the destruction of ancient woodland, and I am genuinely unclear as to whether those concerns have been appropriately addressed. The developer has taken control of Drumkinnon wood, which is not part of the proposed development but beside it, and I am concerned that it could be used for compensation and enhancement when woodland and biodiversity are lost elsewhere, if I have captured the report’s findings accurately. I am bemused as to how not developing on ancient woodland can be considered to be compensation and enhancement—surely that is just the status quo. We need to consider whether the current proposals are in Balloch’s interest or the national interest. 16:35”
“The reporter noted that there were no significant objections from the community when the LDP was first drafted, but it was drafted to cover 2017 to 2021, and consultation started long before 2017. A decade had probably passed before the community was properly consulted on the matter. Asking a community whether it is okay to expand tourism through the development of a high-quality amenity is very different from proposing a development of such sheer scale. I will raise two specific concerns. First, my reading of the 80-page document is that the reporter appears to be confident about active travel infrastructure. Yes, there would be a monorail close to Balloch train station, but we all know that people would bring cars and use Lomond Banks as a gateway to the Highlands, and the monorail would not take visitors to Luss, Arrochar or Inveraray.”
“In his findings, the reporter said: “The planning authority’s reasons for refusal raise no objections to the principle of developing the appeal site for the types of development that are proposed, and the report to the planning authority’s Board advised its members that the proposed development, both within the areas that have been allocated for development in the LDP and elsewhere, is supported by the LDP.” That is important. I see from the national park website that the new local development plan is being developed. I hope that that will involve meaningful strategic community consultation. It would perhaps be far better to allow the new local development plan process to run its course before taking a decision on a new development of such significant scale.”
“Doing so is an important check and balance in the system, and it is required in this instance. Another group of people who have reached out to me and other parliamentarians—this is really quite important—is the community around Balloch. There appears to be a complete disconnect between many members of that community and the developers. Community buy-in is hugely important, but it appears to be missing, which is a significant weakness for our national park, as well as the developer. I was born and brought up in the Vale of Leven, which is only a stone’s throw from Balloch, so I am particularly disappointed at the lack of buy-in.”
“Having read the 80- page document issued by the reporter—it took some going, let me tell you—after he arrived at his decision, I think that it is fair to say that, although it is detailed, it is not drafted to make it easy for interested parties to consider its findings in a speedy and accessible fashion. I know that the findings need to be detailed, but they also need to be accessible and straightforward for readers, who are not necessarily always planning professionals or experts. Ensuring confidence that a robust decision has been arrived at transparently is important for the integrity of any planning system, and it is reasonable to say that confidence is quite low among many. Given the clear national interest and the substantial widespread concerns, the Scottish Government is correct to call in the plans.”
“In this short debate, I will give voice to many of my constituents who have raised concerns over the reporter’s decision on the Lomond Banks application. I do not represent the Balloch area, but my Maryhill and Springburn constituents who have contacted me want to ensure that their voices are also heard. They see the potential development at Balloch as nationally significant, and I agree. Along with many others, my constituents have concerns about the proposed development’s scale, the impact of potential flooding, the loss of ancient woodland, traffic and the wider impact on the local area. They are right to have concerns, but they do not believe that the report has adequately addressed them.”
“I move, That the Parliament agrees that the Lomond Banks planning application for a development at Balloch should be called in for determination by the Scottish Ministers. 16:07”
“It is clear that Ivan McKee has taken a view, and I do not believe that it would be appropriate for him to consider the matter. I note that others in Government—for example, ministers involved with Scottish Enterprise—have taken an interest before, as ministers first instructed Scottish Enterprise to dispose of its assets, including this land, and have been involved in discussions since. I would be grateful for confirmation on those points. This has been the most controversial planning application in my constituency and, indeed, probably the whole of Scotland. We must ensure that, whatever decision is arrived at, it is fair, transparent and democratically accountable. I hope that ministers will recognise that Loch Lomond is the jewel in Scotland’s crown and act accordingly, because anything less would be an utter travesty.”
“Will Jackie Baillie give way? Jackie Baillie: I am happy to, if Bob Doris is brief. Bob Doris: As someone who hails from that part of the world, I concur with Jackie Baillie’s point. My mum and dad were in Levenvale until they passed away. We need more people stopping off in Balloch, with its high-quality tourist amenities, but the scale of the Lomond Banks development is beyond what the infrastructure can currently support. Jackie Baillie: I agree absolutely with Bob Doris. I am not against development at the site, but we need to think carefully about the size and appropriateness of any development in the context of the surrounding environment. In closing, I ask about the timescale for consideration and which minister will make the decision.”
“Such proud social histories should be recorded, and the dedication of community volunteers past and present should be recognised and celebrated. I finish by offering my heartfelt thanks not only to the Summerston Community and Environmental Group for all that it does but to all the volunteers whose efforts have made Summerston a better place to live over the past 50 years. 17:20”
“SCEG wants to see improvements to the quality of core paths, both those within Summerston and those that connect it to other local communities such as Cadder and Acre. It also wishes to see a large open and grassy area near St Blane’s primary school become a high- quality and welcoming community amenity—a landscape in that area right at the heart of Summerston. Given SCEG’s constructive and can- do attitude, I suspect that we will see progress sooner rather than later. I wanted to put on the public record in Scotland’s Parliament the ambitions and successes of some of the current crop of community activists in Summerston. In 50 years’ time, when a future generation of people in Summerston look to celebrate 100 years, they can look back with pride and admiration for those who went before.”
“When the irrepressible Wilma Mather attended my drop-in advice surgery in Ledgowan hall in Maryhill a few years ago, she was focused—my goodness, she was focused— on improving Summerston. Her actions, and the actions of other community volunteers, following that meeting—actions that I, in some small way, sought to support—led to SCEG’s formation. I knew that something special was happening when hundreds of people attended a community consultation event that we jointly organised locally. The views that were gathered from the community were used to inform the actions, always community led, that the Summerston Community and Environmental Group would take forward. SCEG has two big ambitions for Summerston. I am sorry—that is not true; it has many big ambitions for Summerston, but I will mention just two.”
“The Summerston Community and Environmental Group has given particular attention to ensuring that the Summerston at 50 anniversary is appropriately marked and celebrated. Those celebrations kicked off late last year with a winter lantern parade, in which many children from local schools paraded around Summerston, led by a piper. It was a poignant and special event. The celebrations will culminate on 30 August with a community festival in the grounds of John Paul academy. Local schools will be heavily involved, and there will be musical performances, sporting events, many activities and good food. It will also be a multicultural event, celebrating Summerston in its rich and diverse entirety. I certainly look forward to attending. In my remaining time, I will say a little about SCEG’s formation.”
“As the Summerston retail park is a particular challenge in relation to environmental issues, we are, together, seeking a meeting with owners of the commercial units and the businesses that operate from them to identify sustainable and long-lasting improvements. We hope that that meeting will be scheduled soon. There are other visible signs of SCEG’s work. The Summerston in bloom project has been a major success, with large community planters now positioned at various locations across Summerston, improving the local environment— they look absolutely stunning in full bloom. To bring the local community together, there are now regular Easter and Christmas fairs and summer gala days. For a while, it was not always so. The fact that the community now anticipates, expects and looks forward to such events is testament to SCEG’s success.”
“I want to comment on the work of the Summerston Community and Environmental Group in a very particular way. The group is well aware of some of the environmental challenges that Summerston faces. As it should, it challenges local elected representatives to improve the local area. However, SCEG also asks what it can do to assist in improving the local area. It will not surprise many to learn that, with three primary schools, a secondary school and a retail park with various takeaways and a large supermarket in the area, litter has become a significant challenge. In its efforts to tackle that, the group has done all that it can to ensure that local cleansing services respond timeously and as often as possible, but it also organises regular large-scale pick-ups. SCEG also thinks strategically.”
“I thank every one of them for what they and others do. There is one name that is missing from that list but is specifically mentioned in my motion, and that is Billy Souter. Sadly, Billy passed away a few months ago. Billy was the beating heart of Summerston—he was absolutely committed to the Summerston Community and Environmental Group, because he was absolutely committed to Summerston. Everyone knew Billy. He volunteered for years at John Paul academy, and he was a one-man environmental improvement team—always driven, always energetic and always committed to the Summerston community. I suspect that we all know Billys in the communities that we all represent across Scotland: people just like him, who should be celebrated. His loss is felt keenly by many, and, fittingly, there will soon be a memorial bench in his honour.”
“I suspect that, over Summerston’s five decades, there were a few Mrs Fowlers who did so much to knit a new community together as it grew and expanded from the first housing developments in the area, including housing co-operatives in Westfield and Invershiel. I know that the Summerston Community and Environmental Group would welcome a social history project to celebrate and recognise the often untold and unwritten history of the community, which can quickly be lost over time if it is not written down and recorded. However, today’s debate is about celebrating our current crop of community champions. I want to name some of them—Wilma and Sharon Mather, Jean Wilson, Simon Baxter, George and Helen Carnochan, Vicky Dewar, Janice Ross, Pierre Parrier, Angela Smith, Sam Allwood and Scott Milligan.”
“There are three excellent local primary schools: Caldercuilt, Parkview and St Blane’s, which my nine-year-old son attends. John Paul academy is a local secondary school that offers so many opportunities for young people locally and beyond. I want to begin by speaking about Mrs Fowler, a lady whom I never had the privilege to meet and who has long since passed away. Wilma Mather, who is here this afternoon and was instrumental in establishing SCEG a few years ago, told me about Mrs Fowler. Wilma said that she did everything to help people and was always willing to help to sort out local issues. If someone passed away, Mrs Fowler made sure that they got a good send-off. Official records do not always capture the rich social histories of communities such as Summerston and the people who make those communities so special.”
“I thank all the MSPs who have supported my motion, allowing it to be debated in the Scottish Parliament. I also thank the Summerston residents who have joined us in the public gallery for the debate. They are members and volunteers of the Summerston Community and Environmental Group. Today’s motion celebrates the community of Summerston reaching its 50th year. In particular, it celebrates the efforts of the amazing Summerston Community and Environmental Group to improve and enhance the local environment and to develop and promote a positive civic pride in Summerston. Summerston has been my home for the past 13 years. It is the only home that my two children, who are nine and four respectively, have ever known, and we are very lucky to stay there.”
“In the context of American isolationism, the European Union is becoming critical to our common defence and security. Previously, that was an area of policy that was largely confined to NATO. It is important that Scotland, with its defence and technological capabilities and its economic capacity, steps up and plays its role in supporting our European colleagues. I think that we can do a lot with Ukraine on a bilateral basis to build that capability. I make that constructive suggestion for the cabinet secretary’s consideration. 16:09”
“I remember the community discord that existed at that time. There was a danger that Glasgow could become a city riven by racial strife, but the effort that the community put in to rebuild trust and to establish connection stands as a powerful example. I hope that, across Scotland and the wider United Kingdom, we can learn a positive lesson from that experience in Glasgow. In places where settled and established relationships have been built over time, the sense of hostility to migration abates. It is important that we learn the right lessons from our experience in Glasgow. We can teach our neighbours across the UK a lot in that regard. When it comes to what we can do around Europe, I think that our efforts must be centred on defence and security. Mr Cole-Hamilton mentioned our recent trip to Ukraine.”
“[Made a request to intervene.] Paul Sweeney: I am happy to give way to Mr Doris. Bob Doris: I commend Paul Sweeney for his work as the convener of the cross-party group on migration, of which I am the deputy convener. He makes a good point about hostile environments. In that light—I realise that he is in a difficult position—will he reflect on Keir Starmer’s comments about a nation of strangers and how that creates a hostile environment for many new Scots whom we rely on in Scotland’s core public services? Paul Sweeney: It is certainly not language that I would have used. With the complexity and sophistication of the integration effort in the city, Glasgow is a very good demonstration of how we avoid people becoming strangers. In 2001, when I was 12 years old, a Kurdish refugee was murdered in Sighthill.”
“To ask the Scottish Government how the justice system aims to support women who experience financial and economic abuse from a partner. (S6O-04648)”
“For example, we have to do far better on hospice at home care. Sandesh Gulhane: Will the member take an intervention? Bob Doris: Will I get some time back, Presiding Officer?”
“It added: “SPPC does not believe that all risks can be eliminated.” On the inequalities that exist with regard to the actual choices that people have, I ask members to consider the Marie Curie dying in the margins project. The exhibition was on display in the Parliament, and we debated the study, which clearly demonstrated the impacts of poverty, inappropriate housing and the varying levels of support networks. Among many other things, those impact on the life experiences and choices that are open to those who have a terminal diagnosis and require palliative and end-of-life support. I chair the cross-party group on palliative care in our Parliament. I am confident that access to high- quality and specialist palliative care exists. There can be a good death. However, I am not confident that access to that is consistent or sufficient.”
“Rona Mackay: Does the member acknowledge that it is part of doctors’ everyday practice to recognise coercion—for example, in abortion care or in cases of the withdrawal of treatment? Does he acknowledge that that is part of their work and that extra training will be given in the light of the bill? Bob Doris: I absolutely acknowledge that, but the complexities that are at play when we talk about assisted dying mean that I am not reassured that that could be done adequately and robustly. The Scottish Partnership for Palliative Care said that “It is important to acknowledge openly that there may be trade offs between” different goals. For example, maximising choice for some “may increase the risk of coercion of vulnerable people” and groups, “since procedural safeguards are seldom fully effective”.”
“However, that must be weighed against a series of other considerations. For example, considerations regarding potential coercion and the lack of choice for some who have terminal conditions give me real cause for concern. The Scottish Association of Social Work captured much of my concern when it stated: “The Bill focuses almost exclusively on physical conditions, neglecting the equally crucial role that relationships, financial circumstances, home environment and social networks ... play in such a decision.” Coercion can be very subtle and difficult to detect. This is no slight on medical professionals, but I am not sure that they are best placed to identify it, and I note that social workers would like social work to have a mandatory role in the process, including in determining the potential for coercion.”
“I thank Liam McArthur for the exceptional way in which he has conducted himself in this debate, and I thank members of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee for their efforts. The only thing that is clear about today’s debate is that, irrespective of how we vote as members, many of our constituents will be left deeply disappointed. The sheer number of emails that we have received and the range of views in them are testament to that. Although the debate on assisted dying should not be a polarised one, that can be challenging when the reality is that parliamentarians are being presented with a binary choice today. In considering the bill, we are all wrestling with providing autonomy and choice for terminally ill people who have advanced and progressive diseases, illnesses or conditions.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the potential impact on Scotland’s public finances as a result of the United Kingdom Government increasing employer national insurance contributions. (S6O-04591)”
“The UK Government’s austerity agenda is putting significant budgetary pressure on Scotland as we try to protect the most vulnerable here, who are increasingly being targeted by the Labour Party. Given the devolved impact, will the First Minister urge Keir Starmer to act on a new study, published by the London School of Economics, that says that, if the UK Government were to follow Scotland’s policies, 700,000 children would be lifted out of poverty? How could Scotland reinvest that money to benefit my Maryhill and Springburn constituents, and those beyond, if it did not have to pick up the failures of the UK Government?”
“In my final moments, I want to make a connection that I do not think has been clearly made with regard to good-quality land management plans, exercising the right to buy and lotting arrangements. A land management plan worth its salt will make reference to areas of land that will be of benefit to the community in the next five, 10 or 15 years, and lotting arrangements could feed into that process, if a sale were ever to take place. I support the bill’s general principles. 16:29”
“My important point, however, is that I am keen for the land and communities commissioner to be able to undertake proactive investigations in the absence of a report from a designated body. I am pleased that the Scottish Government will consider that, but I want to go further. Each year, a small number of land management plans should be proactively investigated for compliance in the absence of a reported breach. Land management plans must not just exist on paper; they must be implemented in practice—and not just the community consultation element, either. Depending on the nature of any non-compliance that is identified, support rather than sanction might be the most appropriate outcome.”
“That said, I should note the difference between the sort of wilful non-compliance that should be subject to fines, and landowners requiring support to meet their duties in this area, with good practice and advice being shared among them. I want more substantial fines in some cases of non- compliance, but I do not want a rush to apply fines or sanctions. Our landowners remain key partners in all of this. That brings me to the role of the proposed land and communities commissioner. I want the commissioner to develop a positive, supportive and constructive relationship with all stakeholders, and large landowners will be at the heart of that process. Hence, I have distinguished between dealing with wilful non-compliance and supporting large landowners to be compliant, as well as acknowledging the good practice that already exists out there.”
“We were clear that that must not be a tick-box exercise, and I am pleased that the Scottish Government has agreed to consider the issue further. Briefly, on the cost of pulling land management plans together, some witnesses’ estimates varied greatly. I was left unconvinced by many of their arguments, because I find it contradictory on the one hand to say that much of this work is taking place anyway and, on the other, to raise cost concerns. However, many excellent landowners out there are already regularly consulting communities in a meaningful way, and when we bring regulations forward, we must do so in a way that recognises that good practice. I repeat the committee’s view that a one-off fine for landowners of up to £5,000 for non-compliance is insufficient, so I am pleased that the Government will look at that again.”
“Does Bob Doris share my concern that it is not just costs on the landowner that would increase—he has addressed that—but costs on the Land Commission, which has already been told that it has to find the money from existing budgets? Bob Doris: If I have time, I will address the issue of the new commissioner in detail. Landowners already consult with communities and have land management strategies, so I hope that large landowners will embrace the changes rather than resist them. Our committee was clear that community engagement has to be meaningful and landowners should be able to demonstrate how they have taken community views and considerations into account when drafting their land management plans.”
“I say this to the Government: the committee heard on several occasions that good landlords will already have most of the elements of a land management plan in place, because that is what good landowners do. We were told a similar thing with regard to community consultations. Good landowners, as a matter of course, consult with communities living on or beside their land on an on-going basis. We were told that time and again. If they are good landowners, as most will be, I cannot for the life of me see why large landowners would be concerned. Douglas Lumsden: Will the member take an intervention? Bob Doris: I will take a very brief one. Douglas Lumsden: I have a very brief question on costs.”
“The gardens would fit 50 times into a threshold of 1,000 hectares, and I think that most fair-minded people would say that an area of land that is 50 times the scale of Glasgow’s botanic gardens should have a plan. It seems like a no-brainer to me. For me, that part of the bill certainly needs to be looked at again. The Scottish Government has said that such a reduction would double the number of large holdings required to develop such a plan to 700, which, to me, is not burdensome but positive. The Scottish Government noted that lowering the threshold could add cost, as it would increase the number of landowners who had community engagement responsibilities.”
“The Scottish Government’s response to our report shows that the Government has found that scrutiny to be beneficial, and it is up for many of those amendments. I look forward to working in partnership on such matters. I want to look at the threshold for the duty on large landowners to produce a land management plan, which I think is important. Our committee asked the Scottish Government to reflect on the threshold of 3,000 hectares, given that there have been many calls for it to be lowered. I will simply reiterate what I said at committee: Glasgow’s botanic gardens and grounds, which sit in my constituency—in part, anyway—would fit 150 times into 3,000 hectares. It would seem remarkable that, if the gardens fitted only 149 times into an area of land, that land would not be required to have a land management plan.”
“As a member of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, I thank all our witnesses who, for a prolonged period, gave their time to provide valuable evidence on the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill. That evidence has supported the committee in completing our stage 1 report on the bill, the principles of which were agreed by the majority of MSPs on the committee, myself included. Before I go into detail on some of the bill’s provisions, I wish to make a general point. It is clear from our report that there is a desire for Parliament to shape the legislation and take it further than where it currently stands, and it is likely that there will be a considerable number of amendments. That shows that our committee system in this place is working well.”