Compulsory Purchase Reform: Consultation Responses Summary

2. Overview: How compulsory purchase works

Question 1: Do you agree that legislation governing compulsory purchase procedures and compensation in Scotland should be brought into a single statute?

All but 2 of those who responded to this question expressed support for the creation of a single statute bringing together compulsory purchase procedures and compensation. Neither of those who answered ‘no’ provided comments.

The majority of respondents who expressed support stated that the current system is overly complex, outdated and needs to be simplified, modernised and clarified. The effects of this situation were also mentioned: delays, costs and uncertainty. The need for transparency, fairness and consistency was a recurring comment. Several respondents noted that modernising the legislation would help establish compulsory purchase orders (CPOs) as a more effective tool for accelerating housing supply and infrastructure delivery.

Several groups supported the proposal with caveats, such as preserving and strengthening protections for affected landowners, tenants and vulnerable groups. Some suggested that empty home CPOs require tailored provision within any new legislation. A few respondents who expressed in-principle support underlined that any new statute would need to be compatible with existing powers in the Electricity Act 1989.

Question 2: Do you have any specific concerns in relation to the repeal of existing legislation on CPO procedures and compensation that we should consider?

There were 73 responses to this question. Of these, around half indicated that they did not have any concerns about the repeal of existing legislation without providing further qualification; a number of those who answered ‘no’ did go on to qualify that response.

The focus of the question was intended to seek views on the potential legislative risks around repealing existing statutes as part of reform. However, a number of respondents expressed their concerns about, and/or aspirations for, compulsory purchase reform more generally, such as: better early engagement; stronger safeguards for those affected by CPO; changes to compensation; resourcing and capacity issues. Most of these issues were covered by specific questions later in the consultation document.

The majority of respondents who provided comments on the specific issue of repeal were concerned about possible unintended consequences: legislative gaps being created, enabling powers being altered, or the rights of (and safeguards for) affected parties being weakened. Related to this, some respondents were concerned specifically with the loss of provisions which serve other purposes, such as the Lands Clauses (Scotland) Act 1845, or with ensuring compatibility with other legislation, such as the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984, or that governing the Lands Tribunal for Scotland. Several respondents raised the loss of precedents in case law based on the current statute, or with the replacement of robust and well understood procedures in some areas (e.g. the authorisation process and compensation rules).

Several respondents made comments about the importance of appropriate provisions being put in place to ensure a smooth transition from the current to the new system, especially for live cases at the time of change. Related to this were calls for clear and timely user guidance on such transitional arrangements and the new system.