Cuine a thig a mhì-chothromach ann an 'calpachas ann an nàdar' a chur ceart?

Chan eil fhios an cur an aithisg ùr a thàinig a-mach bho Choimisean Fearainn na h-Alba cus dragh air na h-uachdarain.

Tha luach oighreachdan na h-Alba air a dhol an àirde gu mòr ri linn na taic airgid poblach a tha ri fhaighinn airson pròiseactan uaine

[English-language version below]

Abair fhèin g’ eil e tomadach is gleansach, ag iarraidh orra barrachd a dhèanamh airson buannachd a thoirt dha coimhearsnachdan, gu sònraichte nuair a thig e gu craobhan a chur agus ath-stèidheachadh na mòintich.

Ach nuair a thig e gu aon is gu dhà, chan eil mòran coltas neart air a chùlaibh. Cha mhòr nach eil iad ag ràdh: “Seo a tha sinn an dòchas a nì sibh agus seo a lùigeadh sinn a dhèanadh sibh.”

’S dòcha gum bi cuid a dh’uachdarain ann a ghabhas ris ceart gu leòr, a thuigeas gur e seo an rud ceart, ach cha dèan e mòran son crathadh bunaiteach a thoirt air mar a tha oighreachdan a’ làimhseachadh nan coimhearsnachdan, mas e sin an t-amas a tha air a chùlaibh.

Tha an aithisg a’ tighinn às dèidh gealltanas bho Riaghaltas na h-Alba gum bi iad a’ coimhead ris an airgead a tha iad a’ toirt seachad airson “calpachas ann an nàdar” – pròiseactan a bhios nam buannachd dhan àrainneachd – a bhith nas cunntachail.

Ach, tha mòran dhen chron air a dhèanamh mar thà. Tha luach oighreachdan na h-Alba air a dhol an àirde gu mòr ri linn na taic airgid poblach a tha ri fhaighinn airson pròiseactan uaine agus thathas air na mìltean mòra de thalamh a chur fo chraobhan gun guth air beachd na coimhearsnachd. Tha e a’ fàgail an dragh: Eil càil a bhrìgh air cùlaibh nan gealltanasan ùra seo.

Mar eisimpleir, cha robh leisg sam bith air na h-Uainich a tha anns an Riaghaltas dìon a dhèanamh air na mìltean mòra de dh’airgead a chaidh a thoirt dha na h-uachdarain is companaidhean eadar-nàiseanta airson craobhan a chur air sgàth èiginn na h-àrainneachd. Cha robh tìde a bhith draghail mu dheidhinn nan coimhearsnachdan, ann am faclan eile.

Airson a bhith cothromach ri Coimisean an Fhearainn, chan eil an dleastanasan orra-san cò a tha dol a dh’fhaighinn taic-airgid agus cò nach eil, ach tha na faclan anns an aithisg aca ag innse na sgeòil fhèin: “Bu mhath leinn fhaicinn gun tig buannachdan dhan choimhearsnachd a dheasbad leis a’ choimhearsnachd ionadail tro chòmhradh”, a leantainn gu “aonta foirmeil”.

Ach, chan eil e furasta aonta coimhearsnachd fhaighinn oir bidh diofar bheachdan ann, agus càite a bheil an ùine airson sin a cheadachadh?

Dìreach bho chionn cola-deug, thuirt ministear nan cùisean dùthchail Mairi Gougeon gu feumar gluasad nas luaithe airson craobhan a chur. Ceart gu leòr, thuirt i gum bu chòir a dhèanamh ann an dòigh “faiceallach”, ach cha robh sgeul air càil mu dheidhinn guth na coimhearsnachd. ’S dòcha gur e mearachd a bh’ ann.

Gu seo, chan eilear air cothrom sam bith a thoirt dhan t-sluagh ionadail a dhol an-sàs san deasbad agus tha ceist ciamar a ghabhas sin a bhith a-nis agus targaid de 18,000 heactair ann airson 2025. A rèir ’s na tha air tachairt gu seo, cha bhi an dòchas ro mhòr g’ eil an t-atharrachadh dha-rìribh.

English-language version:

The new guidance issued to land and estate owners on how they should introduce more community benefit into their plans is unlikely to have too many of them quaking in their Hunter wellies. The Scottish Land Commission blueprint, all glossily produced and high-falutin as it may be, reads more like a begging invitation that says: “Here’s what we’d like you to do and here’s what we think you really ought to do.”

In other words, all too easily ignored. There will probably be some of the more enlightened land owners who will grasp the sentiment and go with it, but it’s hard to see how this will achieve any kind of revolution in reversing the relationship between estates and the communities on their land, which should be the intention.

The document, ‘Delivering Community Benefits from Land’, is clearly intended to dovetail with the Scottish Government’s commitment last year to introduce more “responsible investment” to “nature capital”, the funding awarded for environmental land measures, principally tree plantations and peatland restoration.

Leaving aside that much of the damage has already been done – Scottish land values have soared on the back of the green public investment available, and thousands of hectares of trees have been planted with next to no community involvement – the real concern is that the commitment is mere window dressing to quieten criticism.

For example, the supposedly left-wing ethical Green party in government have been bullish in their defence of handing over millions of pounds to private estates and investment companies as the climate emergency demanded it. No time for all the complications around community involvement, then.

In fairness, it’s not really the Scottish Land Commission’s remit on who should get the money and who shouldn’t, but the wording of the document is instructive: “Ideally, community benefits should be discussed and agreed with the local community through engagement and negotiation” leading to a "formal agreement or memorandum of understanding regarding community benefits”.

Community engagement, if it’s to mean anything at all, is no simple process as in any collective group there will be differences of opinion and it usually takes some time for a general consensus to emerge. But where is that time to be afforded? Just two weeks ago, rural affairs minister Mairi Gougeon said that Scotland needs to “ramp up” its tree-planting agenda, with a £1 million extra investment for Scottish Forestry to make it happen. She did mention it should be in a “careful and considered way”, but the words “community benefit” were absent. Perhaps that was just an error.

So far, community benefit has been completely bypassed in the green land rush and it’s hard to see how that will now be addressed with a target of 18,000 hectares of planted woodland by 2025. Given what’s gone before, a sense of scepticism will likely prevail.