Executive Summary
Consultation on the draft Crofting Reform Bill began on 19 May 2009 and closed on 12 August 2009. This report provides an analysis of the responses received during the consultation, which included both written responses to the consultation document and verbal responses made during public meetings. A total of 422 responses were received to the written consultation and a total of 540 people attended the 19 public meetings.
There were five parts to the draft Bill and the following paragraphs summarise the main points arising from each part:
Reform of the Crofters Commission
In general, there was support for the principle of a more democratic and accountable Crofters Commission although there was some concern over the proposals for Area Committees. There were concerns that Area Committees would lead to disputes within communities and it was generally considered that regulatory decisions should be taken away from the area but with input from the network of assessors.
Crofting Register
There was support for the principle of a new, map-based crofting register. However, there was little support for the proposal that those registering croft land should contribute towards the costs of operating the register. Some were also concerned that the process would lead to disputes being created over croft boundaries.
Standard Security
There appeared to be little demand for provisions that would enable croft tenants to grant a standard security over their tenancy. Some were concerned that their security of tenure would be threatened in the event of a default.
Occupancy Requirement
There was considerable opposition to the proposal for an occupancy requirement on houses built on land taken out of crofting tenure in order to tackle the speculative development potential of croft land. Many felt that a more proportionate solution was required.
Crofting Regulation
There was support for the proposal to define owner-occupiers and to strengthen the Commission's ability to tackle absenteeism and neglect of croft land. Some were concerned over the proposal to amend existing assignation and bequest provisions to ensure equality of treatment between family and non-family transfers.