Plenary, 29 Mar 2001

Meeting date: Thursday, March 29, 2001

Official Report 667KB pdf

---

Homelessness in Fife

Members' business today is a debate on motion S1M-1340, in the name of Mr Keith Harding, on homelessness in Fife. It would be helpful if members who wish to take part in the debate would indicate that they wish to do so now, while Mr Harding is assembling his props.

Motion debated

That the Parliament notes that homelessness in Fife has risen 38% over the past three years, affecting 3,388 households and that the figures for Scotland show an increase of 12% over the same period; further notes that this has occurred at a time when Fife Council has failed to collect millions of pounds of rent arrears and lost income from unlet properties, and recognises that these resources could have been used to bring unlet homes back into use or for better computer systems to match people to homes as part of a programme to help alleviate homelessness in the Kingdom.

I start by thanking the Parliamentary Bureau for selecting my motion for debate today. I also thank the MSPs, from across the political spectrum, who have supported it. Homelessness is a very serious issue wherever it occurs. I am particularly concerned about the situation in the kingdom of Fife where, in recent years, the problem has grown much faster than it has elsewhere in Scotland.

I will illustrate the situation with some figures that I find shocking. Between 1997 and 2000, the number of households that applied to Fife Council under homelessness legislation increased by 38 per cent. That means that, in the last full year for which figures are available, an additional 938 families applied to the local authority as homeless, bringing the total for 1999-2000 to 3,388.

Let me put that figure into context. Throughout Scotland there was also a record level of homelessness applications in the same year. That record level was equivalent to 46,000 families. Although the increase across Scotland over the three years was 12 per cent, that figure was barely one third of the rise that was witnessed in Fife. Clearly, the situation in Fife is particularly intolerable, even by the standard that has been set nationally since new Labour came to power.

What is the plight of the people who apply to Fife Council for a home? It seems that they are offered bed-and-breakfast accommodation or some other type of temporary accommodation. I need not remind members of the well-known evidence from Shelter and other organisations of the detrimental effect that living in bed-and-breakfast accommodation can have. It is worse for children, whose health, education and emotional well-being are endangered. A lack of cooking facilities often leads to a poor diet and extra expense, because takeaways become the only option. Family life becomes impossible if parents have to share a bed-and-breakfast room with their children for longer than a very short period.

In those same three years, the number of households in Fife in bed-and-breakfast accommodation rose by 78 per cent. That is a shocking figure. It is especially bad because the previous Conservative Government took measures to assist councils financially so that they could reduce and eliminate the use of bed-and-breakfast rooms as temporary accommodation. Those measures, I must record, were very successful and reduced the use of such accommodation by one third, before the figures started to rise again to record levels in 2000.

In 1999-2000, the level of bed-and-breakfast use in Fife was so bad that the Scottish Executive's official housing bulletin recorded that the increase throughout Scotland was

"mainly due to an increased use of such accommodation in Fife."

Although homelessness has worsened dramatically, Fife Council stands accused of not taking adequate steps to address the situation.

Mr Harding made a point on how the situation has worsened dramatically. Will he comment on the latest quarterly figures that have been published, which indicate a decrease in homelessness in Fife of 24 per cent, and overall decreases in the four previous quarters? When one compares full-year figures, the numbers are down throughout Scotland by 2,000 applications. I would have thought that that was something that the member could welcome.

If the minister does not mind, I will address those points during the remainder of my speech, when I will talk about some of the minister's figures.

Lost rent from unlet properties cost Fife Council £1.65 million in 1999-2000 and those homes were not available to alleviate homelessness. At the same time, rent arrears stood at £3.4 million. That not only increased costs greatly for those tenants who paid, but it meant that less money was available to bring unlet homes back into use.

The minister will no doubt tell us—she already has—that things have got better during the past year. I welcome that—but one swallow does not make a summer. I note from the figures that were released today by the Scottish Executive that there has been an improvement in the number of homelessness applications in Fife. However, the fact remains that, during the first six months of 2000-01, there were 353 more homeless families in Fife compared to the same period in 1997-98. We still await the figures for the rest of that year.

The Executive's own figures, published this week, show that for every additional 10 homeless families in Scotland since Labour came to power, almost nine are in Fife. I note that the use of temporary accommodation has worsened, despite promises of investment by the Executive. I also note that any improvement has not yet taken us back to the 1997 levels that Labour inherited, let alone improved on them. Again, Fife families have suffered much more than families who are seeking social housing elsewhere in Scotland.

In 1997, Tony Blair and new Labour were elected on a promise to end the scandal of homelessness. Those were his words. It is now up to his ministerial colleagues here in the Scottish Parliament, and his party colleagues in Fife Council, to make belated attempts to fulfil his pledge for the people of Fife. What I—and the thousands of homeless families in Fife—hope to hear from ministers today is not more of the same announcements about task forces, working parties and one-off grants to deal with the problem in the short term. We need to hear more of the vision for change in social housing that is being addressed in the Housing (Scotland) Bill. Fife needs more and better social landlords. Can the minister give us any encouragement that homes in Fife will be transferred to local housing associations that have their roots in the communities, that have their tenants' priorities at heart and that will work to reduce arrears, to bring empty houses back into use and to build new homes to solve the crisis in Fife in the long term?

Will the member give way?

No, sorry.

Fife needs more than one-off handouts to solve its problem. I hope that my initiating this debate will have raised the profile of the issue and will lead to more being done to help those in Fife who seek housing. As a member for Mid Scotland and Fife, I will continue to keep up the pressure on ministers to see what more can be done. I hope to hear today that the measures that the minister will take will be forward-looking, realistic and achievable. I hope that they will address urgently the situation in Fife, which is much worse than in the rest of Scotland. I also encourage ministers to press their colleagues in the administration of Fife Council to address their failings on rent arrears and unlet properties, and to adopt proposals for stock transfers and greater tenant involvement. If those things are done, the long-term solution to making homelessness in Fife a thing of the past might just be in sight.

Five members have asked to speak, so I ask members to keep their speeches to three minutes.

Thank you, Presiding Officer, for the opportunity to contribute to this debate and to put on record the innovative approach to tackling homelessness that is being taken by Fife Council.

Fife Council has developed one of the most innovative homelessness services in Scotland. It has a homelessness strategy that includes performance targets, such as a target to end the use of bed-and-breakfast accommodation as temporary accommodation. I would have thought that everybody would welcome that. The council has already achieved a 25 per cent reduction in the use of bed-and-breakfast accommodation and it is committed to maintaining that progress. It has been allocated £1.5 million in rough sleepers initiative funding to develop services that include direct-access accommodation and outreach workers. The council also successfully bid for bed-and-breakfast initiative funding and received £460,000 to develop two projects to increase its stock of temporary accommodation. Its service is accessible, because of the commitment to decentralisation, but the council also recognises—this is important—the reality of hidden homelessness. Fife Council works hard to encourage not only those who are homeless, but those who are threatened with homelessness to contact them.

Fife Council has a longstanding involvement with the rough sleepers initiative, and has developed innovative projects the length and breadth of Fife in collaboration with the voluntary sector. However, no one is suggesting that there should be complacency. Continuing hard work and commitment will be necessary if we are to remove homelessness from Fife.

One homeless person in Fife is one too many. I welcome the work that has been undertaken by the Executive's homelessness task force, and the statistics that have been released today, which show a 7 per cent fall in homelessness throughout Scotland. The task force's work contributed to part 3 of the Housing (Scotland) Bill, which has been introduced by the Executive. That bill aims to improve services to homeless people, and will include many of the measures that have been undertaken by Fife Council. It should be noted that the number of homelessness presentations in Fife reduced from 3,867 to 3,388 last year.

In relation to rent arrears and loss to voids, rent arrears in Fife amounted to 5 per cent of collectable rent, against a Scottish average of 5.5 per cent. On that basis, Fife Council—one of the largest housing authorities in Scotland—is performing better than the Scottish average. An examination of the statistics on lost rent that is due to vacant dwellings reveals that Fife Council performs better than the Scottish average. The vacancy rate in Fife is 2.3 per cent, compared to a Scottish average of 3.7 per cent. If we take into account only the normal letting stock, the vacancy rate for Fife is reduced to 1.5 per cent.

In conclusion, I pay tribute to all the staff in Fife Council who work hard with homeless people and who try to support different needs throughout the community. I also pay tribute to the voluntary sector for its hard work and commitment to those who find themselves homeless.

I thank Keith Harding for initiating the debate. I declare an interest, because when I worked for Shelter Scotland I was responsible for collating the homelessness figures for Scotland, so the homelessness statistics are very familiar to me.

First, I begin by offering a health warning on whether the number of applications should be used as a measure of homelessness. That is a dangerous thing to do, because although local authorities are supposed to record every homelessness application, many do not. I remember that, at the time of local government reorganisation, there was an outcry in the Borders when Shelter produced its figures, because homelessness seemed to have risen by something like 2,000 per cent. In fact, when the district councils came together they adopted the best practice of recording every application to them, which other authorities did not do. That gave the impression that there was a huge increase in the number of applications in the Borders, but in reality that was not so. It is therefore extremely dangerous to measure homelessness solely by the number of applications.

Secondly, what worries me more about homelessness is not the number of homelessness applications that are made, but the number of homelessness acceptances. Current homelessness legislation places barriers in the way of helping people, because they can be accepted as homeless and allocated a house only if they jump through a number of hoops. The hoops are that the person must be in priority need—they are if they have children—and they are not intentionally homeless. That means that a lot of people who have no home are not eligible under the homelessness legislation. That is why we see on the streets so many young people who have no dependants. It is a matter of regret that we are seeing more young folk on the streets. That can be linked back to the removal and discontinuation of benefits.

Fife, please, Miss Marwick.

I will wind up by talking about temporary accommodation, because its use in Fife is too high. The use of bed and breakfasts for family accommodation is unsuitable. It is to be regretted that Fife has the highest percentage of households in temporary accommodation in Scotland. I hope that the minister can address that.

It takes some nerve for a Conservative to lecture us on homelessness, when during the last 10 years of the previous Conservative Government, the number of homelessness applications in Scotland rose from fewer than 25,000 a year to more than 40,000 a year. When those who are not deemed to be homeless are excluded, the figures almost double from about 15,000 to 30,000. Therefore, Keith Harding has some nerve to try to lecture us on homelessness.

Many factors contribute to homelessness in Fife and elsewhere. North-East Fife has a particular problem with the availability of affordable housing, which is an important aspect that contributes to homelessness. During 18 years of Tory housing policy—although it takes some nerve to call it a policy—the stock of available affordable housing was decimated. That was partly because of the council house sales strategy—50 per cent of the council housing stock in North-East Fife was sold—and partly because the consequent investment in other forms of affordable housing did not take place. Only in the past two or three years have other forms of rented housing or affordable housing become available. That lack of stock contributes greatly to the homelessness problem.

Fife is not unique in having a homelessness problem, but I agree with Tricia Marwick that using the gross application statistics as a basis for counting the problem may not be the best system. Those figures do not tell us how many homelessness applications are subsequently satisfactorily housed or the time that it took to house them satisfactorily, for example. I am not saying that Fife's record is good, but it is important to look beyond the gross application statistics.

Keith Harding's motion refers to rent arrears and unlet properties as if they were somehow the cause of the problem in Fife. I am not here to defend Fife Council; that was Marilyn Livingstone's job today and Scott Barrie's job last week. However, I will compare its record with that of another council, which I will pick at random—Stirling Council. In Fife, there are 10 homelessness applications per 1,000 of population. In Stirling, there are 11 such applications. In Fife, rent loss as a result of unlet houses is 2.15 per cent of rent income on the most recent figures, and it is falling. In Stirling, the figure is 2.57 per cent, and rising.

Sorry, but I have only half a minute.

The Scottish average for rent loss is 2.87 per cent. In Fife, rent arrears last year were 5 per cent. That is an unfortunate increase from the previous position and I hope that the Executive is addressing that. However, at 8.86 per cent, Stirling Council has the fourth-worst record in Scotland. Perhaps the residents of the Torbrex ward in Stirling would be more impressed if their councillor—Keith Harding—spent a bit more time on Stirling Council trying to deal with its appalling housing record and wasted less of our time in the chamber.

I find the debate bizarre, because I will agree with Iain Smith on two points. The first concerns the naffness of the Tories coming here and talking about homelessness after what they did to housing in Scotland for 20 years. The second concerns Iain Smith's agreement with Tricia Marwick about the inadequacy of counting homelessness applications in Fife or nationally.

I take it that the member welcomes the fact that the Executive is putting in place an electronic data capture system that, unlike the system we inherited from the Conservatives, will measure people, not applications.

I welcome that. As I have said before, under homelessness legislation a code of guidance was issued to councils. As Tricia Marwick said, how councils operated that code of guidance depended on their philosophy. I hope that the Housing (Scotland) Bill will be amended to include provision of proper guidance.

Fife is not my area. When I read Keith Harding's motion, I was quite surprised to discover how bad things are there, but the situation there is indicative of the national picture. Today, I examined the national picture. It is ridiculous. Our current measure of homelessness, by application, shows that homelessness has risen. The underlying trend is falling, but there is no denying that homelessness has risen every year since 1997. The figures are in the Scottish Executive's statistical bulletin.

What initiatives are in place to deal with homelessness? I studied the empty homes initiative in Fife. It is a five-year initiative that was put in place in 1997 and will run to 2002. Only a year remains, but less than 60 per cent of the available money has been drawn down. In Fife, the award was £916,842. In four years, only 38 per cent—about £348,000—has been drawn down. It is clear that that initiative has not worked as it was intended to. New housing partnerships affect Fife, like everywhere else. Only 50 per cent of the 2000-01 budget for new housing partnerships has been spent.

Keith Harding mentioned the rough sleepers initiative in Fife. By the end of January, only 48 per cent of the agreed funding for the year had been spent. I would never dispute that the ideas are good or that the initiatives are great, but the implementation of the initiatives is important and has been lacking in the past few years.

The extension of the right to buy in Fife and everywhere else, as is proposed in the Housing (Scotland) Bill, is ill informed. Each house that is purchased under the right to buy in Fife or elsewhere is a house less for allocation to the general waiting list or to a homeless person. Homelessness should be alleviated by keeping a stable and increasing housing supply. That supply should not be eroded.

I will be brief. The statistics have already been covered. We need a more accurate measure—if that is possible—of actual homelessness. The figures for Fife and throughout Scotland are stark. Fife reflects the position in Scotland as a whole.

I have serious concerns about the use of temporary accommodation, particularly bed-and-breakfast and hostel accommodation. I have a particular interest in tackling drug misuse. Unless the hostels that I have visited in the region are small and well supported, there is great potential for drug problems. The problem of young, single, homeless people has to be addressed.

The Housing (Scotland) Bill could be much more radical. The former convener of the Social Inclusion, Housing and Voluntary Sector Committee has yet again to respond to a debate on issues that were covered in part during her convenership of that committee. We rest our hopes on her.

The debate has covered issues relating to young, single, homeless people, local authorities giving advice and information to the people they serve and potential conflicts of interest. I would be grateful if, in winding up, the minister could update members on the homelessness task force and its work on categories of homeless people.

I welcome what the Minister for Social Justice has done on resources. I am an admirer of hers, not of all ministers, I hasten to add. I am an admirer—I will be generous: it is Thursday—of what the minister and her deputy are trying to do. However, £27 million over three years divided between 32 local authorities is not a great deal of money. Members can work out how many homeless people will be affected by that money. It would be interesting if the minister could indicate in her reply what impact she expects that money to make—I do not expect an exact figure, but the kind of impact. The problem deserves more resources.

Mr Harding has done a Portillo: he is forgetting his Thatcherite past, divesting himself of his Thatcherite mantle and is now social inclusion personified. Consider homelessness in Stirling and Mr Harding's transformation. He used to be the leader of Stirling Council. Now, he is following Mr Portillo—he is always a mimic—and trying to be social inclusion personified.

The Conservative party, which during its period in power reduced council housing stock in Scotland by 36 per cent and contributed enormously to homelessness, has the nerve to come to the chamber and raise the flag of social inclusion as if it is the party of the homeless. Forget it. We know that we are approaching an election, but if Mr Harding thinks he can pull the wool over the eyes of all the Scottish people on that issue, he is completely wrong.

I feel quite intimidated: how can I follow that? I keep promising in debates that I will be gentle with Keith Harding, if I may put it that way. After a tiring Thursday, I might not work up the energy to be as angry with the Tories as I normally am.

I congratulate Mr Harding on securing the debate. Although few of us are here, the debate has been good and lively. I say in passing to Keith Raffan that if I do not give all the details in response to his speech—I was trying furiously to take notes—I am happy to talk to or correspond with him to reassure him on some of them. I will try to make some reference to them. I respect his commitment on drugs issues and will happily try to pursue such issues.

Members can imagine what I am going to say. We see this as a good day, in terms of the statistics. Jackie Baillie has dealt with some of the points already. I acknowledge that the total number of homelessness applications in Fife and Scotland did indeed rise by 38 per cent and 12 per cent respectively in the three years from 1996-97 to 1999-2000, but I am pleased to report a fall of 18 per cent in the total number of applications recorded in Fife in the first two quarters of 2000-01 compared with the same two quarters in the previous year. Indeed, total homelessness applications in Fife have fallen for the past four successive quarters, when compared with the same quarters in the previous year.

The latest homelessness statistics, for the quarter that ended September 2000, are published today. I very much welcome the news that homelessness applications for Scotland as a whole for that quarter are down by 7 per cent compared with the same quarter in 1999. As in Fife, total homelessness applications in Scotland have fallen for the fourth consecutive quarter when compared with the same quarters in the previous year.

I want to be clear about what the Executive has indicated today—if members will bear with me, the debate demands reference to other situations. The statistics show that 17 local authorities have reported a decrease in applications. Aberdeen City Council recorded a decrease of 161, which is 34 per cent; Fife recorded a decrease of 252 applications, or 24 per cent; and Glasgow, with the largest number of homelessness applications, recorded a decrease of 252 applications, or 8 per cent.

We are cautiously optimistic that our approach to tackling homelessness is beginning to have a positive effect. I can assure members that neither Jackie Baillie nor I would ever be complacent about this issue. Members have alluded to the intractable nature of many of the problems that we face. This is about not only counting figures but profound social issues. Our efforts to address the problem are taking place against a backdrop of improving economic conditions and steadily falling unemployment. Those are contributing factors.

We are, however, well aware that the recent falls in homelessness applications are measured against an unacceptably high base. I am duty bound to point out that that base is one of the legacies of the previous Conservative Administration, when homelessness applications in Scotland rose by 66 per cent, from 24,741 in 1988-89 to 40,989 in 1996-97.

We appreciate that homelessness is a complex and difficult problem that requires long-term, sustainable solutions. We have introduced a number of measures that will have a positive impact on Fife and the rest of Scotland. Since coming to power in July 1999, we have pledged to ensure that by 2003 no one in Scotland should have to sleep rough. That is a challenging target that we appreciate will be difficult to achieve. We are not complacent about the measures involved.

I appreciate the minister's tone. In fact, I want to impress on her that some 25 per cent of homeless people are ex-serving members of the armed forces. I ask her to use her influence with her Westminster colleagues, as it is obvious that after leaving the armed forces people are not being handed over properly into local authorities. The armed forces could keep them in a better system before sending them on. In Scotland, 25 per cent represents a large number.

I am happy to respond to that—it allows me to make a point in response to Keith Raffan. We are aware of such issues; in fact, the homelessness task force has been grappling with that matter. Phase 2 of the task force will give specific attention to people leaving the armed forces, as we are well aware of how they feature in homelessness statistics. I am sure that we could do preventive work there. Prevention will be one of the themes of the second phase of the homelessness task force. Keith Raffan alluded to the profound issues that surround extremely vulnerable people, such as those leaving care. There are some big issues there, which the next phase of the homelessness task force will tackle.

We have made increased funding—to £42 million—available to the rough sleepers initiative for the five years 1997 to 2002. I know Jackie Baillie well now—she is always fighting for more resources for our portfolio and will continue to do so. We have made a substantial financial commitment to this policy area, but we will always argue for more resources if any are available. Nonetheless, across the board the Executive has made a substantial commitment that has allowed us to make considerable progress.

I welcome more money going into the rough sleepers initiative, but I have a genuine concern about how underspent the initiative has been so far. Has the homelessness task force undertaken to look at better ways of implementing that scheme so that full use can be made of the available resources?

When Linda Fabiani made that point in her speech, she may have noticed me whispering to Jackie Baillie. I am not sure that I share her view about the underspend. Payment is made in arrears, so our differing views may be the result of different statistical interpretations. Jackie Baillie and I see that money as having been spent. I shall get the details of that spending and send them to Linda Fabiani, but we do not share her underlying point.

My point arose from a parliamentary question.

Nonetheless, we should answer Linda Fabiani's concerns through correspondence. When it allocates money, the Executive expects the money to be spent. We monitor that very carefully.

Will Margaret Curran give way?

I really have to get on with my speech.

We will ensure that money is spent wisely. That is the Executive's approach. It is why we made £5.3 million available this financial year, targeted towards reducing some local authorities' dependence on inappropriate temporary accommodation, particularly bed-and-breakfast accommodation, for homeless people.

Tricia Marwick asked questions about bed-and-breakfast accommodation. The figures reflect all temporary accommodation, which can range from fairly substantial and quite acceptable furnished flats provided by local authorities to less acceptable bed-and-breakfast accommodation. We are trying to get specific figures on the use of bed-and-breakfast accommodation.

The minister is quite right to say that bed-and-breakfast accommodation must rank as the worst type of temporary accommodation and that we must do something about it. Given the tone of Keith Harding's motion, does she agree that it might be better if he were to spend some of his political time trying to convince his Tory councillor colleague in east Fife to support Fife Council's attempts to get rid of bed-and-breakfast accommodation in east Fife and provide better secure temporary accommodation?

I agree with Scott Barrie's excellent recommendation.

We established the homelessness task force in August 1999 and have included its recommendations for legislative amendments in the Housing (Scotland) Bill and backed that with the £27 million that has been referred to. We strongly believe that the bill will provide for a dramatic improvement in the rights of homeless people. Most people are aware of the inclusive view that has been taken by the task force, which is now moving on to its new phase.

I would like to refer to the Glasgow review team, because it has implications for our whole homelessness strategy. The team was established to review our efforts to tackle the problems of street homelessness in Glasgow. Its report and recommendations also have been accepted by the Executive, and an additional £12.5 million over three years has been made available to decommission Glasgow's large, bleak hostels. Although that review is based in Glasgow, it has relevance for Fife.

We have done more in two years to tackle the scourge of homelessness than the Conservative Government managed in all its 18 years in office. I think that that is the most important point to make in this debate in response to Mr Harding.

Meeting closed at 17:43.