Politicians were told yesterday to fix a piece of defective agricultural holdings legislation, but to ensure they do it fairly.
The plea was made by various groups as they presented written and verbal evidence to the Scottish Parliament’s rural affairs, climate change and environment committee. It is considering a Scottish Government proposed solution to section 72 of the 2003 Agricultural Holdings Act. It was ruled outside the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament and a breach of human rights by both the Court of Session and the UK Supreme Court. The view yesterday was that while the proposal offered a solution it did not go far enough.
NFU Scotland chief executive Scott Walker said after giving evidence that there was still some way to go before the proposal can deliver clarity and a path cleared for those affected to follow for resolution. “While this remains an unsatisfactory situation, the supreme court’s ruling must be dealt with in as practical a way as possible. But we recognise that the outcome will be painful for tenants who thought they had security and may see that unpicked.”
Richard Blake, the legal adviser to Scottish Land and Estates, said parliament had to correct the legislation, make sure any solution complies with human rights legislation as well as also put landlords back to where they were before the original section was enacted. He sympathised with tenants who now faced having to reorganise their businesses because of a defective piece of legislation.
He said SLE remained concerned that all affected landlords had not been afforded equal treatment by the proposals. It is also worried that some aspects of the proposed solution are still not compliant with human rights’ laws.
“Ill-informed comment and speculation about the threat to tenants has not helped matters. It will be possible for the parties to agree an alternative business structure where a lease will come to an end because of the proposed legislative fix.”
Scottish Tenant Farmers Association director Angus McCall reminded MSPs that while the focus had been on landlords’ rights they needed to recognise that tenants’ rights had been violated too. Some had benefited and entered new arrangements with their landlords. Others now faced losing the secure tenancies they had been granted by the courts. A third group had for years been mired by the expense and stress of litigation as they tried to defend the tenancies to which they believed they had a legitimate claim. “In bringing forward this remedial legislation the current government is now at risk of depriving tenants of the rights they have been given and on which they had acted on over the last decade. If tenant farmers are to be deprived of their rights they must at the very least receive due compensation from government and this should be acknowledged in the remedial order.”