I HEARD the triumphal trumpet blast proclaiming a radical shake-up of Scotland's archaic land-ownership laws. But my ''world'' has not moved a single inch.
Ben Loyal still lumps the Sutherland horizon beyond my window. To the west, Ben Hope remains in its accustomed place. The salty tide still ebbs and flows beneath the bridge over the causeway between our township of Tongue and the moorlands of the Moine Peninsula. ''Private Fishing'' signposts still sentinel the brackish banks of the River Kinloch at the head of the golden Kyle.
For the foreseeable future, I suspect that Highland life is going to be pretty much ''business as usual'' for the lairds; and for battalions of rapacious ''feudal superiors'' who demand their pound of flesh every time one or other of their captive tenants cough.
The ''Brave New World'' which we all anticipated, that land wherein we Scots own the soil upon which our ancestors lived and worked for generations, seems to be as elusive as ever; an ephemeral, Celtic fantasy, enveloped in the white mist of a forlorn hope.
The participants involved in the preparation of this report, which the Scottish Secretary promulgated on Wednesday, have welcomed his proposals. The Herald, which has fought tirelessly for land reform, described them as being ''the most radical and ambitious programme of land reform since the Crofters won security of tenure in the Crofting Act of 1886''.
Mr Andrew Dingwall-Fordyce of the Scottish Landowners' Federation said: ''We welcome this document''. The Duke of Buccleuch commented: ''It is really suggesting that people should be doing what we have been doing for generations''.
The fact that the Scottish Landowners' Federation and Scotland's principal landowner should so readily embrace these ''reforms'' worries me, greatly. It stands to reason. For centuries these people have never welcomed anything radical; other than bucketfuls-more public cash in subsidies and grants to support them in the style to which they are determined to remain accustomed.
Something smells. Call me a cynic. I am almost certain that a compromise must have been reached within the portals of the corridors of power between self-serving Scottish Office negotiators and Scotland's ''lairds''.
The radical proposals formulated by the Scottish Office Land Reform Policy Group include the provision for a community to have the right to buy the land upon which they live and work, when it comes on the market; to give them time to find the necessary funds in order that they might do so; and to have the price of the land set by a Government-appointed valuer.
I may be wrong, but surely the basic substance of these ''radical proposals'' already exists? It has been available to all and sundry for many years. There is nothing new or radical here.
The only stick this wimp of a report wields is the threat that ''bad landlords'' might have their properties confiscated by the use of compulsory purchase powers. Local authorities have had these powers for decades and could have, and should have, used them, in one form or another, to bring recalcitrant lairds to heel.
They have never done so. It is highly unlikely they will do so now, just because a report has been published. Even if they were so minded, the legal implications, and the resultant costs, would scare the breeks off them.
Scotland's lairds are well aware of this fact. To neutralise the policy-makers, they have assiduously cultivated their good-favour as a matter of self-preservation. Nothing mollifies a politician more, local or national, than an invitation to sup with the laird.
Forelock-tugging is alive and well in the Highlands and few tug harder than the vast majority of our elevated, elected representatives. They are as likely to change their spots now as that wee mannie on top of Ben Braggie is likely to tumble off his perch into the cold waters of the North Sea.
I suggest that all this report does is maintain the status quo. Otherwise, it would never have achieved the wide measure of support which it has received.
Once again, we Scots have been served up another dud dish of high-sounding words which, in effect, mean very little. Fine phrases and vague promises are no substitute for bold, affirmative action. It is hard to escape the conclusion that the timing of this announcement is not unrelated to the forthcoming elections to the Scottish Parliament. ''One up'', yet again, to the lairds. Burns must be birling in his grave.
Bruce Sandison,
Hysbackie,
Tongue,
by Lairg.
January 7.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article