Land Reform and it's Impact On Stalking and the countryside

[Barkingsnake]

Can I suggest that each of us in this thread responds to this:

https://consult.scotland.gov.uk/land-reform-and-tenancy-unit/land-reform-scotland/

 

[private fraser]

Done

 

[David Brown]

I don't agree that public money should be used to buy public and private land in Scotland as is currently happening.

but I think Monbiot makes a very interesting point here:
"It’s no coincidence that the two most regressive forms of taxation in the UK – council tax banding and the payment of farm subsidies – both favour major owners of property. The capping of council tax bands ensures that the owners of £100m flats in London pay less than the owners of £200,000 houses in Blackburn. Farm subsidies, which remain limitless as a result of the Westminster government’s lobbying, ensure that every household in Britain hands £245 a year to the richest people in the land. The single farm payment system, under which landowners are paid by the hectare, is a reinstatement of a medieval levy called feudal aid, a tax the vassals had to pay to their lords."

This statement by Monbiot is again an example of how media and politicians can say something to back up their views that can take folk in but is not really truthful. The single farm payment ,which is part of the EU common agri policy and is French and German driven, does not belong to the landowner unless he is also the farmer. It is the farmer who owns the entitlement and will be in many cases a tenant who can take it with him on giving up the tenancy leaving the landowner with no part of this. I think a lot of tenant farmers would not recognise the description of them as " the richest people in the land" . Monbiots likening of the SFP to feudal tax is rubbish. Farm subsidies are made in all the developed world to some extent , with the purpose of using progressive taxation to keep the cost of food down by helping with the cost of production. It can ,of course be argued , that this is less than successful.
I have never understood how a tax on the value of property one has bought should affect how much you should contribute to the financing of local services. A local income tax would be a lot fairer.

However all this just shows that some people hate the fact that people can own property. Remember the "all property is theft" war cry of Trotskiites. I think some politicians will not be content till no one owns anything and ambition is stifled to the lowest level.

David

 

[Sinistral]

If the SFP is payable only to tenants as you say, then I would suspect that its' value is worked into their lease agreement anyway.?

To me there are two points which can't be denied.

The first is that 'Scotland’s determination to open up the question of property taxes ...... might lead to the only system that is fair and comprehensive: land value taxation.'

The second is that unlike E & W 'the owners of only 26% of the land in Scotland have been identified' with the proposal that the ownership & value of public land will be recorded within 5 years, and private land within 10 years. The public have a right to know who owns what before any meaningful debate can take place.

 

[David Brown]

If the SFP is payable only to tenants as you say, then I would suspect that its' value is worked into their lease agreement anyway.?

To me there are two points which can't be denied.

The first is that 'Scotland’s determination to open up the question of property taxes ...... might lead to the only system that is fair and comprehensive: land value taxation.'

The second is that unlike E & W 'the owners of only 26% of the land in Scotland have been identified' with the proposal that the ownership & value of public land will be recorded within 5 years, and private land within 10 years. The public have a right to know who owns what before any meaningful debate can take place.

I did not say the SFP is payable ONLY to tenants. I said that a landowner would have entitlement if he was also the farmer (during the reference years to be exact) and if a farm is let it is the tenant who owns the right to subsidy NOT the landowner. There is no doubt that some, and I think it will be very few, farmers get a subsidy that they don't need to make a decent profit but the majority couldn't trade in this modern world where we have come to expect cheap food without one. Also I would think most agri tenancy agreements predate the creation of SFP so can't be worked into agreements.

David

 

[6pointer]

LFASS gives out a lot of cash David many be the pound was made round to go round.

IntroductionThe Less Favoured Area Support Scheme (LFASS) is an area based scheme provided for in EC Rural Development Regulations. The objectives are to:

• Ensure continued agricultural land use in order to contribute to the maintenance of a viable rural community;
• Maintain the countryside; and
• Maintain and promote sustainable farming systems.

The Scotland Rural Development Programme (SRDP) was submitted to the EC in June 2007 and includes detailed proposals for LFASS covering the period 2007-2009 and 2010-2013.
The scheme has been very advantageous to nearly 13,000 applicants, and aims to contribute £65.5m in 2010. The 2010 payment rates have been finalised.
The scheme has been revised and the latest version of the Explanatory Notes and additional LFASS 2011 information are available to view.

 

[NewForester]

Can I suggest that each of us in this thread responds to this:

https://consult.scotland.gov.uk/land-reform-and-tenancy-unit/land-reform-scotland/

I have had a look at this and responded, but all the questions are loaded questions.

- Do you agree to such and such a proposal? Yes or No
- What are the benefits of this proposal?
- What other ways could this proposal be implemented?

 

[Taff]

I don't agree that public money should be used to buy public and private land in Scotland as is currently happening.

but I think Monbiot makes a very interesting point here:
"It’s no coincidence that the two most regressive forms of taxation in the UK – council tax banding and the payment of farm subsidies – both favour major owners of property. The capping of council tax bands ensures that the owners of £100m flats in London pay less than the owners of £200,000 houses in Blackburn. Farm subsidies, which remain limitless as a result of the Westminster government’s lobbying, ensure that every household in Britain hands £245 a year to the richest people in the land. The single farm payment system, under which landowners are paid by the hectare, is a reinstatement of a medieval levy called feudal aid, a tax the vassals had to pay to their lords."

Believe it or not but the biggest claimants of SFP are government bodies, railways and water company's, these payments are used to subsidies costs to the tax payers, your councils countryside service, I.e country parks , footpath maintenance is all a recipient of this funding.
You may not know but the rules are changing next year, so to keep your services you will have to pay more or see. A reduction in these services.

As to farmers getting it , most farmers would be more than willing to do away with subsidies, and all the paper work that goes with it, as long as they could have a level playing field, with the rest of the world.
but remember this will mean a end to the cheap food policy that has been in existence since the beginning of WW2, farmers would grow what they like when they like, and how they like.
Doe,s the owner of the flat in London require more services than the house in Blackburn, no, he most probable uses less, pays more income tax, spends more on luxury items, so pays more vat, O the politics of envy,

 

[Barkingsnake]

I have had a look at this and responded, but all the questions are loaded questions.

- Do you agree to such and such a proposal? Yes or No
- What are the benefits of this proposal?
- What other ways could this proposal be implemented?

I found that stating that there was not any advantages made me feel a lit better!

 

[private fraser]

I listened to "the big debate" on radio Scotland today at lunchtime.

When it came to the subject of land reform, the level of "debate" was depressingly low. The audience actually jeered when just the very word word stalker was mentioned and cheered when the breaking up of estates was mentioned. They positively hooted when a panel member said it was like a Mugabe style land grab.

As someone on the panel commented, it was largely an urban audience. It was difficult for him to say much though as he was a representative of a land owners association and was quite shamelessly interrupted and talked over. The "debate" wasn't well run at all. I wonder what a more country region audience would have said.

The subject of land being divided into smaller and smaller plots was raised but the member to which the question was addressed said he "preferred to address the question of the big estates not paying business tax", and therefore completely avoided the issue. He was cheered by the audience, or at least some members of it. That same panel member was still bitter about the referendum result and made some quite nasty comments.

Pretty depressing stuff. I can only hope folk in the country regions of Scotland can have their say.

 

[JabaliHunter]

but I think Monbiot makes a very interesting point here:
"It’s no coincidence that the two most regressive forms of taxation in the UK – council tax banding and the payment of farm subsidies – both favour major owners of property. The capping of council tax bands ensures that the owners of £100m flats in London pay less than the owners of £200,000 houses in Blackburn.

It may be interesting, but its complete rubbish! They pay more in terms of actual cash, but the percentage paid relative to the value of their property is lower.

 

[Blackpowder]

All frightening stuff, even worse now that the Wicked Witch from the West is in charge, I suspect she knows as much about rural affairs and economy as a dog knows of its own father. So is the Scottish Socialist Republic going to re-create basic agriculture in the head of the glens. Run rigs and hand ploughs , a row of oats a row of potatoes a few turnips and a milk cow, its all scary stuff. Already there are plans afoot to ruin the Scottish wild fish fisheries by political meddling. The Report of the Wild Fisheries Review Panel (October 2014) is written in a mixture of political and scientific gobblygook , which I find difficult to understand.

The one thing I would say about Land Reform is that the Scottish Government plans will create an unfair and unequal
competition between Scottish and English Estates. Could this be a matter for some of the previously despised European Courts.

The Land Reform bill is exactly the reason I voted NO in September , not wishing to be ruled bu the urban majority between Forth and Clyde.

Blackpowder

 

[NewForester]

Guys, I said this before as a joke, but now I am serious.

It is time for the Highlands to declare its independence from Southern Scotland.

 

[private fraser]

All frightening stuff, even worse now that the Wicked Witch from the West is in charge, I suspect she knows as much about rural affairs and economy as a dog knows of its own father. So is the Scottish Socialist Republic going to re-create basic agriculture in the head of the glens. Run rigs and hand ploughs , a row of oats a row of potatoes a few turnips and a milk cow, its all scary stuff. Already there are plans afoot to ruin the Scottish wild fish fisheries by political meddling. The Report of the Wild Fisheries Review Panel (October 2014) is written in a mixture of political and scientific gobblygook , which I find difficult to understand.

The one thing I would say about Land Reform is that the Scottish Government plans will create an unfair and unequal
competition between Scottish and English Estates. Could this be a matter for some of the previously despised European Courts.

The Land Reform bill is exactly the reason I voted NO in September , not wishing to be ruled bu the urban majority between Forth and Clyde.

Blackpowder

The government is fond of referendums,maybe they should have one on land reform,see how they get on.
Check how the regions voted in the last referendum re the region chart...

Scottish independence referendum, 2014 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Twenty-eight out if thirty two regions voted NO,that's 87.5% and look where they are. Even Salmonds own area voted No (strongly No as per the colour depth in the map).

I think the Radical Independence Campaign is partially behind this bill, it isn't the work of country folk,that's for sure.

 

[Barkingsnake]

The government is fond of referendums,maybe they should have one on land reform,see how they get on.
Check how the regions voted in the last referendum re the region chart...

Scottish independence referendum, 2014 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Twenty-eight out if thirty two regions voted NO,that's 87.5% and look where they are. Even Salmonds own area voted No (strongly No as per the colour depth in the map).

I think the Radical Independence Campaign is partially behind this bill, it isn't the work of country folk,that's for sure.

On some other forums many crofting and independence types are ranting on the need to clobber "Tory toffs" despite the likely negative impact.
Something about regenerating the empty areas of the highlands and giving the land the unemployed to boot.
I have pointed out that the likelihood off many people in that position taking on a buggered croft for regeneration in, say, Tongue, is slimmer than slim...
And then there's the impact on infrastructure, shops, businesses etc.

 

[private fraser]

I think there is legislation on the way to make croft owners spend a certain amount of time the croft and not let it fall into decay.
Wonder what plans they have for lands that are going to be "available" in this new fairer society they are wanting to create.
As pointed out in another post,maybe go back to the runrig system?. Hope the new tenants are able and willing to spend the necessary time on their new land.

 

[David Brown]

The host of the original dinner which sparked off this thread called in last night. She told me how her friends are " delighted beyond measure" with the way land reform is developing. The greatest joy for them is the prospect of setting up a permanent land reform commission . This body ,they think, will sit to dream up more and more ways of radicalising land reform. They will be able to be swayed by lobbyists from the type of organisations mentioned already . She told me that although she did think they were jumping the gun a little they had already identified local estates they thought were ripe for community ownership. The ones mentioned are perhaps the most well run , big employers and tidiest locally. The good state of these places is what is attracting the interest. I asked what the "community " would do with the 12,000 hectares of heather hill and rock. Oh we can do pony treks, walking trips camping - a host of things. She was a bit puzzled when I said all that was allowed already. The only thing she came up with that isn't available now is the building of community wind farms. Well I never- these people were the first to object when a local landowner applied for turbines on his land as they said the Golden Eagles would fly into the blades and be killed. I suppose it's ok for a community owned turbine to kill Eagles then! She also said how these hippy types would volunteer to sit on the committee set up to run the local trust owned holdings and mentioned that ------- ( of the steel pierced face) would make a good chairperson. Is this not just the emergence of an "Animal Farm" type situation ? I have replied to the consultation and now see that if a land reform commission gets set up the whole thing will be unstoppable.

David

 

[6pointer]

Give me a small share of glenfeshie and I could do some thing with it.

 

[Barkingsnake]

The host of the original dinner which sparked off this thread called in last night. She told me how her friends are " delighted beyond measure" with the way land reform is developing. The greatest joy for them is the prospect of setting up a permanent land reform commission . This body ,they think, will sit to dream up more and more ways of radicalising land reform. They will be able to be swayed by lobbyists from the type of organisations mentioned already . She told me that although she did think they were jumping the gun a little they had already identified local estates they thought were ripe for community ownership. The ones mentioned are perhaps the most well run , big employers and tidiest locally. The good state of these places is what is attracting the interest. I asked what the "community " would do with the 12,000 hectares of heather hill and rock. Oh we can do pony treks, walking trips camping - a host of things. She was a bit puzzled when I said all that was allowed already. The only thing she came up with that isn't available now is the building of community wind farms. Well I never- these people were the first to object when a local landowner applied for turbines on his land as they said the Golden Eagles would fly into the blades and be killed. I suppose it's ok for a community owned turbine to kill Eagles then! She also said how these hippy types would volunteer to sit on the committee set up to run the local trust owned holdings and mentioned that ------- ( of the steel pierced face) would make a good chairperson. Is this not just the emergence of an "Animal Farm" type situation ? I have replied to the consultation and now see that if a land reform commission gets set up the whole thing will be unstoppable.

David

Sigh...pony trekking...walking...all requires someone with available funds to want it. There's only so much (in)hospitality industry space and resources.

 

[Barkingsnake]

BTW European Human Rights Act could be interesting.