Power’s ability to resist change: this is the story of our times. Morally bankrupt, discredited, widely loathed? No problem: whether it’s neoliberal economics, tax avoidance, coal burning, farm subsidies or the House of Lords, somehow the crooked system creeps along.
Legally, feudalism in Scotland ended in 2004(1). In itself, this is an arresting fact. But almost nothing has changed. After 15 years of devolution, the nation with the rich world’s greatest concentration of land ownership remains as inequitable as ever.
The culture of deference which afflicts the British countryside is nowhere stronger than in the Highlands. Hardly anyone dares challenge the aristocrats, oligarchs, bankers and sheikhs who own so much of this nation, for fear of consequences real or imagined. The Scottish government makes grand statements about land reform, then kisses the baronial boot. The huge estates remain untaxed and scarcely regulated.
You begin to grasp the problem when you try to discover who owns them. Fifty per cent of the private land in Scotland is in the hands of 432 people(2)— but who are they? Many of the large estates are registered in the names of made-up companies in the Caribbean. When the Scottish minister Fergus Ewing was challenged on this issue, he claimed that obliging landowners to register their estates in countries that aren’t tax havens would risk “a negative effect on investment”(3). William Wallace rides again.
Scotland’s deer stalking estates and grouse moors, though they are not agricultural land, benefit from the outrageous boondoggles that farmers enjoy. They are exempt from capital gains tax, inheritance tax and business rates(4). Landowners seek to justify their grip on the United Kingdom by rebranding themselves as business owners. The Country Landowners’ Association has renamed itself the Country Land and Business Association. So why do they not pay business rates on their land? As Andy Wightman, author of The Poor Had No Lawyers(5), argues, these tax exemptions inflate the cost of land, making it impossible for communities to buy.
Though the estates pay next to nothing to the exchequer, and though they practice little that resembles farming, they receive millions in farm subsidies. The new basic payments system the Scottish government is introducing could worsen this injustice. Wightman calculates that the King of Dubai could receive £439,000 for the estate in Wester Ross he owns(6). The Duke of Westminster could find himself enriched by £764,000 a year, the Duke of Roxburgh by £950,000.
With the help of legislators and taxpayers, the owners of the big estates are ripping apart the fabric of the nation. The hills in many parts look as if they have been camouflaged against military attack, as they have been burnt in patches for grouse shooting. It is astonishing, in the 21st Century, that people are still allowed to burn mountainsides— destroying their vegetation, roasting their wildlife, vapourising their carbon, creating a telluric eczema of sepia and grey blotches— for any purpose, let alone blasting highland chickens out of the air. Where the hills aren’t burnt for grouse, they are grazed to the roots by overstocked deer, maintained at vast densities to give the bankers waddling over the moors in tweed pantaloons a chance of shooting one.
Hanging over the nation is the shadow of Balmoral, whose extreme and destructive management— clearing, burning, trashing, overgrazing— overseen by Prince Philip, president emeritus of the World Wide Fund for Nature, is mimicked by the other landowners. Little has changed there since Victoria and Albert adopted an ersatz version of the clothes and customs of the people who had just been cleared from the land. This balmorality is equivalent to Marie Antoinette dressing up as a milkmaid while the people of France starved, but such is Britain’s culture of deference that we fail to see it(7). Today they mix the tartans with the fancy dress of Edwardian squires, harking back to the last time Britain was this unequal.
But despite this lockdown, there is, if not quite a Highland Spring, the beginnings of something different. On one side of me, here in Boat of Garten, is the bare, black misery of the Monadhliath Mountains. On the other, the great rewilding that is quickly but quietly spreading through the north-west of the Cairngorms national park. Across 100,000 hectares, the RSPB, the Forestry Commission, the National Trust and Wildland Ltd (owned by the Danish textiles billionaire Anders Holch Povlsen)— are seeking to reverse the destruction, reduce the deer to reasonable numbers and get trees back onto the braes. On Povlson’s estates, the area of woodland has doubled (to 1400ha) since 2006, solely through the control of deer. It’s not land reform, but it’s the best that can be done with the current, dire model of Scottish ownership.
The forests at the moment are bright with birdsong. In some places, looking down on lochans surrounded by marshes and regenerating pines, you almost expect to see a moose emerging from the trees. Trees are racing up the denuded hillsides: in Glenmore I’ve come across young pines, birch and rowan growing at 800 metres. Already people are talking about reintroducing lynx here within 20 years. As the return of the ospreys to the lakes and forests in this part of the park shows, the potential for eco-tourism, which spreads income and employment through the economy, is vast. The contrast with the scorched and scoured grouse moors of the east side of the national park, which employ hardly anyone, concentrate wealth in tax havens and are unmysteriously devoid of most birds of prey, could not be greater.
It doesn’t reverse the other injustices, but it begins to undo the centuries of physical destruction. I would vote yes in September if I lived here, on the grounds that it presents an opportunity to do something new, and I furiously hope, despite the evidence, that an independent Scottish government will take it.
It should list all the beneficial owners of the land; impose the taxes Westminster refuses to levy; ensure that only farmers get subsidies and cap them at £30,000 a head; ban burning, control deer numbers, turn Scotland into a land where you can actually see the green shoots of recovery. On Friday the Land Reform Review Group, set up by the government at Holyrood, will publish its report(8), and it’s likely to be devastating. Will Scotland get off its knees at last?
George Monbiot’s book Feral: rewilding the land, sea and human life is published in paperback next month. This piece was first published in the Guardian. Courtesy: www.monbiot.com
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT