WE are concerned that the issues of transparency of land ownership in the Government's land reform is in danger of disappearing.

The Land Reform (Scotland) Bill has its final Stage 3 debate this Wednesday. Transparency is a key part. Land ownership is concealed to avoid tax (eg Land and Buildings Transaction Tax and Inheritance Tax) and to "launder" ill-gotten cash. Even 400 years after James VI’s Register of Sasines to counter fraud, owners of more than one-fifth of all rural land cannot be identified, largely because they shelter behind nominees, many registered in offshore jurisdictions (eg the British Virgin Islands).

The Edinburgh 38 Degrees group is concerned that the proposed draft regulations lack the very transparency they are supposed to ensure. After a year of consultation and committees, still nothing is fixed: it will all be subject to some consultation process to be undertaken sometime in the next parliamentary session. Probably.

There seems to be an insidious introduction of vagueness into this Bill. The original term "persons of significant control (PSC)", which has a clear definition in current UK legislation, has now been replaced by "persons who have controlling interests", an undefined term which may be of less concern to hidden owners. Another clearly defined term (ultimate beneficial owner (UBO)) is already used in the EU Fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive of 2015.

We would like to see a swift clarification of definitions, timetables and terminology. Just as important, we expect to know who will implement the new regulations and what the sanctions will be for non-compliance (eg the registrar should then refuse to register new applications and should deregister existing titles). A 400-year delay is long enough.
Peter Roberts, Vince Fitzpatrick and Chris Mullins
Edinburgh 38 Degrees

PAUL Kavanagh is right to highlight the fact that "it's Westminster which had had its paws on the levers of macroeconomic control" (Wee Ginger Dug: Unionism’s made Scotland sick ... now for the cure, The National, March 12). The glee expressed by the three minor unionist party "leaders" in Scotland – namely Dugdale, Davidson and Rennie – at their own country's current situation is misplaced.

They seem to take delight in attacking the SNP, whereas they are in fact disowning their own country. Such is their craven cry for Westminster and the Union that they fail to take soundings of what their so-called Better Together friends south of the Tweed actually see them as.

In The Guardian on March 12, Phillip Inman posed options for the Chancellor on the forthcoming Budget. Under the heading of North Sea oil exploration, Inman states the Chancellor is "unlikely to shed a tear for the Scots and their much-discussed £15bn financial black hole". But the Chancellor will be "concerned at the loss of foreign currency ..."

The three branch parties and their "leaders" are lumped in with all Scots and the SNP. Perhaps it is time Dugdale, Davidson and Rennie took note. Their uncritical support of the Union is misplaced. With only one MP each at Westminster, they are expendable to what are really just English parties. As English Votes for England LawsEVEL is about to be extended at Westminster after the majority of Scottish MPs voted against the extension of English Sunday trading laws, they too are seen as whinging Jocks.
John Edgar
Blackford

I THOUGHT it would be useful if I “fact checked” Dave McEwan Hill’s letter (Letters, March 11) for the readers of The National. Sadly it would take half the paper to correct all of the flaws so, for the sake of brevity, I shall stick to two.

First, the letter claims that Scotland has not seen a penny of oil revenues as they “go to the Treasury”. This would be like arguing that I don’t see a penny of my wages because it goes to the bank first. Scotland spends more than we raise, including a geographical share of oil revenues, and has done bar a handful of peak oil boom years. As such, every penny of Scottish oil money is spent here.

Second, the letter claims Scotland pays billions for a share of “national expenditure” such as the London sewer system and the London Underground. This is a complete fabrication.

GERS calculates railway spending on an “in Scotland” basis only. The London Underground is quite clearly not in Scotland. We don’t pay a penny towards it.

Only projects which cannot be assigned to a geographical region are designated as “national projects”. Capital spending on these was £18m for the last figures available, far from the billions Mr McEwan Hill wrongly claims.

No public money from any government anywhere pays for the London sewer system – it’s paid for by the private sector.

Perhaps Mr McEwan Hill would like to familiarise himself with the facts before throwing around such misinformed nonsense.
Fraser Whyte
Aboyne

I SEE that Obama is blaming Cameron for the chaos and misery created by the destabilising war on Libya (Obama critical of Cameron over Libya, The National, March 12). Apparently, the British PM didn't pay enough attention to what was going on and presumably didn't follow US instructions closely enough.

Shame on him. If he had only listened to the Americans, Libya would now be in the same state as Iraq after that invasion.
Peter Craigie
Edinburgh

Who will be hit next by Osborne’s attacks?

SO Osborne is facing an £18 billion black hole in the Budget – well, not much of a shock there. Yet it's another £1bn hit to welfare again, so the poorest and disabled, cancer sufferers and wheelchair users who I guess will soon be told by heartless IDS they are to pay for useless Osborne's austerity attacks. What next ask – ask OAPs to hand back their walking aids? There's no level to which this lot will not stoop. The sooner Scots wise up the better, and Labour supporters are deluded if they think Corbyn will be our saviour and PM by 2020.
Stevie, Motherwell via text

HOW is the UK to be powered in the future? Hinkley Point is to cost £18 billion. There is a black hole in the English economy of £18bn and the Scottish Government has a black hole of £15bn: The Welsh lagoon project would cost £1b; reusing water is already happening in Scotland; N Ireland needs this type of investment too (perhaps by uniting with S Ireland).

The Hinkley Project should be jettisoned, and a summit of UK nations called now to debate this and possible new forms of energy being scientifically researched at the moment., eg hydrogen, electric cars, petrol will be needed for some time; it should be cleaned up and free of pollutants; no worker in the oil industry should be left without a job. Proper planning is the order of the day NOW: The days of poor or no planning are over. Ditch Hinkley Point. Unemployment is rising apace. Plan jobs now for the unemployed: don't waste their skills.
AC, Aberdeen via text