Official Report 290KB pdf
Energy Performance of Buildings (Scotland) Regulations 2008 (SSI 2008/309)
Item 2 is subordinate legislation. We have one negative instrument to consider. When we considered the regulations at last week's meeting, we agreed that we would invite Scottish Government officials to the committee to assist us in our consideration. I welcome Gavin Peart, assistant head of building standards, and Linda Hamilton, principal legal officer. We will go straight to questions.
Good morning. I thank Mr Peart in particular for his letter of 31 October to the clerk, which the committee has had the opportunity to consider and which contained some useful points. I turn first to energy performance certificates. You said:
We do not anticipate that. Probably the majority of registered social landlords will end up energy rating their entire property stock. They will hold all those certificates and update them on a regular basis. We do not envisage any hold-up.
I appreciate that that could be the case once everything has been done and all properties have been surveyed, which is a mammoth task. However, in the early days, when transfers are continuing all the time on a day-to-day basis, surely some transfers will be held up.
Again, we cannot say how registered social landlords will carry out their business. However, when a tenant moves out of a property, the RSL must visit it to ensure that it is in good condition, and somebody with a professional qualification would probably do the energy rating of the building then, so all the work could be done at the same time.
I certainly hope that you are right. In your letter you mention that a higher level of professional qualification may be required in some areas to carry out the energy rating. Not only will the work be an additional burden, therefore, but officers who have until now been checking that houses are in good condition and electrically sound and that the central heating works will need a higher skill set or someone with such a skill set to come with them in order to get the work done. I suggest that that would slow down the transfer process.
That is not part of my policy area, but we can find out that information for the committee, if it wishes.
We may want to put that point to the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth later, convener. I certainly want to get some answers on the cost implications of that proposal for the budgets.
We can certainly take a note of that point and get information to the committee on it.
Good morning to both witnesses. My question follows on from Jim Tolson's one. There is an obligation to provide energy performance certificates. Have you estimated how much that will cost local authorities? I recognise that it will be a big job at first, but it will reduce later.
The regulatory impact assessment allowed £100 per energy performance certificate for the social rented sector.
Is that per unit?
Yes, but the information coming through is that the cost is likely to fall and that it could go down to £70. Local authorities already energy rate properties for the Scottish housing quality standard. Again, therefore, there will not really be an additional burden.
Local authorities would have had to do the work anyway, so the money involved should be a recognised cost for them.
Yes.
How does the cost for local authorities and RSLs compare with that for the private sector?
We thought that the cost of an EPC for the private sector would probably be nearer £150. We considered that social landlords would probably be able to take a cheaper-by-the-dozen approach in many instances and get discounts. However, that might not work out for private sector landlords who do not have many properties. Again, though, we reckon that costs will fall. We think that that is evident from what has happened in England.
What training is available for people to take forward the work?
Ten approved organisations have signed up, and they are all actively taking training forward.
You said that the estimated cost for a private landlord to obtain an energy performance certificate would be £150. That would be the fee, but VAT would be added, so the cost would be £150 plus.
We thought that the £150 would include the VAT.
It would be an inclusive cost. That is fine.
The energy performance certificate legislation is different from the home report legislation. However, there is a connection: the software that produces the energy report for the home report is the same software that produces the energy performance certificate. The upshot is that, if you produce an energy report, you get an energy performance certificate as a by-product, and if you produce an energy performance certificate, you get an energy report as a by-product. Therefore, there is really no additional cost.
We have heard that a home report package will have an inclusive cost of between £500 and £800 for the seller. I believe that that is the latest range of figures. You are saying that the energy performance certificate will not in any way add to the cost for any given property.
A certain amount will already be subsumed within the cost, but the certificate will not add any extra cost. As I say, if a surveyor produces an energy report, they will get an EPC free, and if they produce an EPC, they will get an energy report free. An extra cost will not be added, as everything comes out of the same process.
So will the surveyors who do valuation reports and building condition reports also be regarded as "approved organisations"—to use the term in the regulations. Will those surveyors be capable of producing your energy performance certificates and be authorised to do so?
My understanding is that the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors is working towards that, to ensure that the energy report and the EPC are produced at the same time as the home report.
So it is all part of the package.
Yes.
Thank you.
There appear to be no further questions. Do committee members agree that they do not wish to make any recommendation to the Parliament on the regulations?
I thank our witnesses for coming today.
Meeting suspended.
On resuming—
Previous
Budget Process 2009-10