Am Bratach No. 200
June 2008
editor@bratach.co.uk

Land and Environment
1.6.1 We recommend that use should be made of potential flexibilities in the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) Health Check Exercise including:
revision of SFP rates to make their structure flatter, with consideration given to moving towards an area basis for payments, combined with an increase in modulation rates to increase moneys for rural development funding; use of extended national envelope provisions — to address disadvantages for small farmers and crofters in crofting areas, including possibly the funding of a bull hire scheme; and introduction of mechanisms which permit allocations of SFP entitlement to newcomers.
1.6.2 We recommend that there should be a review of existing rates under the LFASS — to make them more reflective of the provision of public goods. Consideration should be given to increasing the minimum payment rate. New rates should be introduced by amendment to the Scottish Rural Development Programme (SRDP) in advance of the end of the current Programme.
1.6.3 We recommend that in the forthcoming EU-led review of the Less Favoured Areas, there should be an examination of the possibilities for linking payment rates directly to the provision of public goods. Consideration should be given to the introduction of “mountain” classification for parts of Scotland.
1.6.4 We recommend the elimination of constraints in the current arrangements which militate against newcomers. This should happen as soon as possible, and not later than the introduction of the new arrangements following the current interim LFASS.
1.6.5 We recommend building further on the clear progress of the new SRDP by introducing: a non-discretionary measure under “Options” suited to crofters and other small businesses with the provisions we set out in section 3.1.12 of this report; and new free standing measures suitable to crofting under “Options” following commissioned research to identify suitable prescriptions, bearing in mind the diversity of crofting areas. 1.6.6 The Crofting Counties Agricultural Grant Scheme (CCAGS) should be retained and consideration given to extending the provisions to include; (a) support for land-based enterprises other than agriculture; and (b) a 10% uplift in support to young entrants.

Strong Rural Economies
1.6.7 We recommend focusing development investment on building the potential of communities to encourage them to develop their own capacities. This would involve building on the lessons of LEADER and Initiative at the Edge.
1.6.8 We recommend greater integration between the “strengthening communities” and “business support” aspects of HIE’s and local authorities’ work — with greater priority being given to small projects (especially microbusinesses), community businesses and social enterprises, together with targeting on the remoter parts of crofting areas.
1.6.9 A strategic approach to in-migration, return migration and population retention should be encouraged — aimed at developing new enterprise and the establishment of the types of communities where people want to live.

Population
1.6.10 An enhanced Croft House Grant Scheme should be introduced — designed to permit house building or improvement without decrofting.
1.6.11 The enhanced CHGS should not be available to those who decroft.
1.6.12 The provision of affordable housing for non-crofters should be supported by the measures detailed at section 3.8.4.
1.6.13 Local crofting development plans should set out in what circumstances housing may be built on inbye land and good common grazings in any local area. There should be a presumption against building on inbye land unless the local crofting development plans specify that this is essential together with any conditions.
1.6.14 Measures to assist new entrants to crofting should be emphasised in the allocation of future funding.

Governance for Crofting
1.6.15 We recommend a separation in the functions of (1) crofting regulation and enforcement, (2) crofting development and (3) the maintenance of the Register of Crofts. Greater local accountability and ownership is also required in the implementation of the regulation and enforcement function.
1.6.16 The Crofters Commission would therefore be wound up. We recommend that the regulation and enforcement function should be discharged in future by a new Federation of Crofting Boards, a single organisation consisting of 7-10 elected Local Crofting Boards, and an executive supplying staffing support, finance and other central services to these Boards.
1.6.17 Responsibility for development of crofting should be given to a powerful Crofting and Community Development body, ideally within HIE.
1.6.18 At community level, Grazings Committees should be modernised to become Crofting Township Development Committees with a broader remit and more inclusive membership. Their primary function will be to develop and agree strategic plans for local crofting development, with the support of the new Crofting and Community Development body.
1.6.19 An annual “State of Crofting” report should be submitted to the Scottish Parliament by the Federation of Crofting Boards, having consulted with the Crofting and Community Development body.

Crofting Regulation and Enforcement
1.6.20 We believe new legislation is needed to replace, simplify and clarify the accumulated laws which set the framework for crofting today.
1.6.21 No change should be made to those rights given to individual crofters in the 1886 Crofters Act, namely security of tenure, succession, fair rents and the value of their improvements. However these rights should only be enjoyed by those resident on or near their croft and using the land beneficially.
1.6.22 We recommend that all croft houses be tied to residency through a real burden, which would be deemed to be included in the conveyancing when next assigned or purchased. This would run with the land in perpetuity. Decrofting the house site or purchasing the landlord’s interest will not extinguish this burden. Crofters may apply to the Local Crofting Board to have the burden removed only if this is in the wider community interest.
1.6.23 A crofter wishing to assign or transfer their croft, or forced to do so through failing to fulfil the residency burden or enhanced burden, should be given three options as set out in section 3.14.4 of this report.
1.6.24 Owner-occupiers and tenants should be treated alike, simply as crofters, in all aspects of crofting. Each Local Crofting Board should have the power to suspend (or not) the 1976 Crofting Reform (Scotland) Act’s right to buy.
1.6.25 All sub-lets and tenancies should require the consent of the Local Crofting Board, who should also be given the power to place a limit on the number of crofts or the amount of land which can be held or worked by any one crofter. The Boards’ policies on these matters should reflect the content of local Crofting Development Plans, where these exist.
1.6.26 Responsibility for the Register of Crofts would be taken over by the Registers of Scotland — following a consultancy exercise to assess the accuracy of the current Register, the specification required to maintain appropriate regulatory action in the future and a transition plan to bring the Register up to that specification.
1.6.27 Boundaries of crofts which in practice have been accepted for twenty years or more will not be challengeable.
1.6.28 The Registration of Leases (Scotland) Act 1857 should be amended to make a crofting lease registrable and hence eligible for standard securities.
1.6.29 All holdings similar to crofts within defined crofting parishes should, if their owners or tenants wish, become subject to crofting regulation.
1.6.30 Government should consider back-dating the introduction of the real burden to all assignations and purchases made after May 12th 2008, so as to forestall any rush to avoid the provisions of the legislation.

Scottish Ministers announced their intention to create a Committee of Inquiry on Crofting in September 2006, Professor Mark Shucksmith was confirmed as its chairman in December of that year, and its full membership was announced on April 2 2007. Over the autumn of 2007 the committee considered all the evidence collected and were beginning to develop their vision. That vision, Towards the Future of Crofting, was described at public meetings during February 2008. The Committee of Inquiry on Crofting presented its final report and recommendations to the Scottish Government on May 12 2008.

Welcoming the report at its launch, Scottish Crofting Foundation chairman, Neil MacLeod, said: “An inquiry such as this only takes place perhaps once in a generation, so we are very pleased to see that the committee has fully recognised the social, economic and environmental importance of crofting, and we look forward to legislation being brought forward to enact their proposals.” On May 15 2008, the Scottish Crofting Foundation praised MSPs for their “unanimity in acceptance of the Committee of Inquiry on Crofting’s report”.

In Parliament, on May 15 2008, Michael Russell MSP, minister for the environment, commented: “On Tuesday morning, I was pleased to read the universally positive coverage of the report. I was particularly struck by a comment from Patrick Krause, the chief executive of the Scottish Crofting Foundation, which was quoted in The Herald. He said: ‘There is no doubt the authentic voice of Scottish crofters is in this report.’ That is true. The report is a testament to the consultation that was undertaken when the report was being produced.”