Land Matters

I will be giving a public lecture in Aberdeen on Thursday 1 March 2012. All welcome. Download LARGE poster here 6.2Mb)

For those who have been following the debate about the future administration of the Crown Estate in Scotland will be aware that the Scotland Bill contained two proposed reforms so inconsequential as to be meaningless.

The first was that there would henceforth be a “Scottish Crown Estate Commissioner” who “must be a person who knows about conditions in Scotland as they relate to the functions of the Commissioners.”

Haud ma breeks.

The problem has never been that the Crown Estate Commissioners have lacked Scottish representation. The Commission has always had a Scottish Commissioner. From 1962 until the retirement of Ian Grant in 2009 (47 out of the Commission’s 55 year history), there has also been a Scottish Chairman – the Earl of Perth, Lord Thomson of Monifieth, Earl of Crawford and Balcarres, Earl of Mansfield, Sir Denys Henderson and Ian Grant (who was also Scottish Commissioner). It’s been a very Scottish organisation.

The Scotland Bill merely proposes to entrenche this state of affairs in statute.

The second proposal is that the ”Scottish Crown Estate Commissioner shall be appointed on the recommendation of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who shall consult Scottish Ministers before making that recommendation.”

Riveting stuff.

Now, after over a year of debate and growing calls to eliminate this organisation from any involvement whatsoever in the administration of the Crown Estate in Scotland, the UK government has conceded that the Scotland Bill needs to go further. Thus,in the Committee Stage in the House of Lords, Lord Browne of Ladyton, Lord Boyd of Duncansby and Lord Davidson of Glen Clova tabled amendments 45, 45A and 45B.

Amendment 45 proposes that the statutory Scottish Commissioner shall, instead of being a “a person who knows about conditions in Scotland as they relate to the functions of the Commissioners.“, shall, instead be “qualified in land management or the law of Scotland” and shall have “experience of the functions of the Commissioners.”

Amendment 45A proposes that the new statutory Scottish Commissioner shall not be called the “Scottish Crown Estate Commissioner“, but instead will be called the “Crown Estate Commissioner for Scotland.”

Amendment 45B proposes that, instead of being appointed “on the recommendation of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who shall consult Scottish Ministers before making that recommendation“, shall be appointed by “Scottish Ministers with the agreement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.”

The Scotland Bill.

Radical stuff.

What with growing concerns about income inequality, bankers’ bonuses, and tax avoidance by the rich, I though I should join a couple of my self-employed writer/activists colleagues (George Monbiot and Alastair McIntosh) and make an annual declaration of interests and income. Two other factors compel me to do so.

I believe that we have too much secrecy in the UK on matters of income and wealth and that if everyone’s income was openly declared, there would be much less inequality. This is not an especially radical idea. In Norway, you can find details of every citizen’s income and the tax they pay on this website.

Secondly, as a member of the Scottish Green Party, I feel obliged to comply with the policy resolution passed at the 2011 Conference on Tax Evasion and Avoidance which encourages corporations and individuals to not use tax havens and to publish their accounts on a a country by country basis.

2010 INCOME

I earn my living by writing, research, consultancy, lecturing, undertaking landownership investigations, subscriptions from the www.whoownsscotland.org.uk website and forestry contracting. During 2010 my income was as follows

GROSS INCOME       £18,359

COSTS                     £ 6,052

NET INCOME          £ 12,307

DECLARATION OF INTERESTS

I own no property.

I have no shares in any companies.

I am on the Board of Directors of the Caledonia Centre for Social Development (Company No. 192099 & Scottish Charity No. SC 028485)

I do not undertake any work for any Government.

My main clients are from the wind energy, community organisations, private landowners and media sectors. In 2010 I earned the majority of my income from royalty advances for my book, The Poor Had No Lawyers.

All of my income in 2010 (apart from a few book sales) was generated from within the UK.

I do not make use of any tax havens or artificial accounting structures to conceal my income.

This morning, I gave evidence at the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee of the Scottish Parliament as part of their Stage 1 scrutiny of the Land Registration etc. (Scotland) Bill (see previous posts for further info). One question asked related to the completion of the Land Register – how long might it take and how long is desirable?

As it happens, I had, as part of a report I wrote on land value taxation (3.9Mb pdf), done some number crunching which you can see in this table. It shows the rate of progress to date and projects this forward to a (theoretical) completion date. A healthy dose of salt is required before concluding anything from this table.

First of all, it takes historic progress and projects this forward. In reality, progress will slow down as properties which change hands frequently enter the Register and the remainder, (which turn over slower) take time to be sold and thus trigger entry to the Register. (though the Bill does introduce new triggers).

Second, these figures relate to the percentage of titles and not the percentage of land cover. Currently, according to the Policy Memorandum accompanying the Bill (para 5), some 55% of titles are registered representing 21% of the land mass. The extent of coverage is shown in Figure 4, page 92 of my book, The Poor Had No Lawyers and you can download a high quality jpeg version of that here (Thank you to Registers of Scotland for this map).

It was suggested by one Committee member that the Bill might usefully contain a target date for completion. I think this is a mighty sensible suggestion. It is worth recalling that in 5 short years between 1910 and 1915, the Inland Revenue, with ink pens and paper maps, had managed to map the ownership of 19,408,700 acres of land in Scotland (99.7% of the land area) held in 1,333,200 parcels as part of the survey of landownership required by Lloyd George’s Finance Act (People’s Budget) of 1910. The rest of the whole of GB and Ireland was also mapped!

If the Edwardians can do it with pen and ink in 5 years, I suggest we set a target for 2025 which gives plenty time.

Union Bridge in1807. Reproduced by kind permission of University of Aberdeen ABDUA 30581

A year ago I was asked to undertake investigations into the history of the Union Terrace Gardens in Aberdeen on behalf of the Friends of Union Terrace Gardens. Today, the Friends have published the report which examines the legal history of the site and concludes that it is common good land and that court approval may have to be sought if Aberdeen City Council wishes to pursue its City Garden project.

The Scottish Government has re-introduced its Long Leases Bill which fell in the last Session of Parliament when it ran out of time. See previous posts on topic here and here and my written evidence to previous Bill Committee.

Put simply, the Bill converts any lease of over 175 years with at least 100 years to run into full ownership – automatically. One of David Murray’s companies currently leases the site of the Waverley Market (now with Princes Mall shopping centre built) for 1p a year on a 206 year lease which expires in 2188. David Murray thus stands to obtain full ownership of this common good asset for 40p (actually, since he has probably never paid the 1p, the cost will be £0.00)

The Scottish Government noted previous concerns and resisted them. In the current, re-introduced Bill, they resist once again. Quite why I cannot fathom.

I do not have the stomach or time to fight this again. If civic Edinburgh wants to leave a legacy to future generations in 2188 (I know it’s a long time), it needs to put up a fight now. If it chooses not to, that’s fine – just be sure you think about it and decide one way or another.