Social Inclusion, Housing and Voluntary Sector Committee, 15 Nov 2000

Meeting date: Wednesday, November 15, 2000

Official Report 156KB pdf

---

Petitions

We have two petitions, the first of which is PE277, from David Emslie, which calls for the Parliament to initiate a public inquiry into the administration of Grampian Housing Association Ltd, with a view to the introduction of legislation to allow monitoring and audit of housing associations.

The Public Petitions Committee has passed the petition to this committee for information and to the Executive for further information on whether the issues raised are to be addressed as part of the consultation on the new executive housing agency. The clerk's recommendation is that the committee notes the petition and asks the Public Petitions Committee to keep the committee advised on the Executive's response. Regulation issues will be part of the proposed housing bill, so that seems a reasonable request to make.

I agree—we should accept the recommendation. However, it would be helpful to write to the Public Petitions Committee to say that, in this committee's housing stock transfer inquiry, we took considerable evidence on the issue of the regulation of housing associations, about which we made several recommendations. We will come back to that subject, especially during our evidence taking at stage 1 of the housing bill. We should inform the Public Petitions Committee that we will have a watching brief on this.

I have an observation on the case that the petition involves, as it raises an important issue. The individual was taken to court by the housing association; he won his case and had his rent and repairs costs reduced. However, all the other tenants receiving the same level of service did not consequently have their costs reduced. The petition has a worrying context.

I know that we cannot go into the details of the case, but the Public Petitions Committee does not seem to want to take a view on it, other than to ask what the Executive will do in general terms. When a petitioner brings a petition to the Parliament, they have a right to have a view expressed on the case that they have brought. This individual has one of the strongest cases that I have seen in any petition that has come before this committee.

As for regulation, the issue is one of the individual as opposed to the collective. I suggest that we respond to the Public Petitions Committee along the lines proposed by Karen Whitefield, referring to the recommendations that were in the stock transfer report, but that we express our concern about how the petitioner had recourse to law but other tenants did not receive the same benefits.

I do not know whether I must declare an interest as a member of the Public Petitions Committee.

I saw your name on the documents.

I thought that I should clarify my position. I am pleased that this committee has had the courtesy to read the petition and to recommend that a letter should be sent back to the Public Petitions Committee. As Mike Watson suggested, it is unfortunate that the Public Petitions Committee does not have the power to take action and can only pass a petition to a relevant committee. Members of that committee are pleased that members of this committee take cognisance of the fact that the complaint is serious. I am pleased with the recommendation.

Perhaps I should declare another interest: I am convener of the cross-party group on older people, age and aging. Another issue that the committee will discuss is refugees, and I am a member of the cross-party group on refugees and asylum seekers.

So we will expand our response a bit, instead of just noting the petition. Do we agree to make points with reference to our housing stock transfer report and to communicate our concerns about regulation to the Executive?

Members indicated agreement.

The general issues that Mr Emslie raises are important. Will we consider taking evidence from him or relevant organisations when the housing bill is introduced? The bill might close any loopholes in current legislation.

The issue involves the rights of tenants with regard to councils and housing associations. That will be part and parcel of the evidence that we take on the housing bill. The committee has expressed concerns about regulation of social landlords and will return to that subject. We will schedule that as part of the evidence taking on the housing bill at stage 1 and beyond.

Petition PE280, from the Scottish Allotments and Gardens Society, calls on the Parliament to recognise the importance and popularity of allotments and to establish an allotments working group to protect and promote allotment provision in Scotland. The Public Petitions Committee passed the petition to us, the Rural Affairs Committee and the Local Government Committee for information and to the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to seek its views. The Public Petitions Committee has also written to the Scottish Executive to ask for its views on the issue in the context of its land reform and housing stock transfer proposals. The clerk's recommendation is that we note the social inclusion issues raised and request that the Public Petitions Committee advises us of the views of COSLA and the Scottish Executive.

As the petition says, the number of allotment places available has decreased over the years, but the waiting list for places has increased in most areas. Allotments can help to provide a great way of life. The petition raises not just social inclusion issues, but health issues and other matters across the board. I would like us to support the petition through the people who can make a difference—COSLA and the Scottish Executive. Local government must make a commitment to ensuring that allotment sites are not snapped up by developers and that places are filled as soon as they become empty. As I understand it, there are huge waiting lists for allotments. Demand is in decline in some areas—for example, allotments seem to have fallen out of favour with the good and worthy people of Springburn in Glasgow—but in other areas the demand is great.

Several committee members take the train between Glasgow and Edinburgh; when the train passes Murrayfield, we see extensive allotments out of the window. Cathie Craigie is right. The first step is to take the views of local authorities and COSLA. We will keep a watching brief and we will want to be advised of COSLA's response. Do we accept the clerk's recommendation?

Members indicated agreement.

Meeting continued in private until 12:25.