Chamber and committees

I am happy to come back to the committee and Ms Gallacher on that point as it develops. We are working very closely with the UK Government on the actions following Grenfell, so there will be on-going discussions on that.

One issue is that each local authority is slightly different in terms of where the RAAC is in their areas. The situation is different in West Lothian, Clacks and Aberdeen. Our approach is based on what the local authorities’ approach would be, which has given them flexibility in their local approaches. Working collaboratively with local authorities is the key thing in that regard.

If members have specific concerns, I am happy to pick those up with local authorities. As I said, I have engaged with all local authorities that have issues with RAAC. If the committee or individual members have any specific concerns, I am happy to pick those up and take them forward. We expect the local authorities to take that approach.

I have engaged with local authorities and I think that they have been engaging with tenants and home owners on that point. If there are any specific issues and if members think that local authorities should be doing more or there is feedback from residents on that, I am happy to pick those issues up with Mr Griffin or with other committee members.

I do not know whether colleagues have anything to add on that. We continue to engage with all local authorities, and officials do so on a regular basis. Stephen Garvin might want to talk about that.

The issue has been raised with the committee before. There is a role for all of us as MSPs to ensure that the culture change that you have just asked about happens; indeed, we have probably all had cases of constituents being blamed by their landlords. I am also aware of an evidence session that you had with Tenants Together Scotland and various local authorities, and I think that guidance to local authorities will be incredibly important in this area. The issue is becoming more prevalent since the sad case of Awaab Ishak, because people are now aware of their rights. That is an incredibly important part of the issue, and it has been acknowledged in the amendment to the Housing (Scotland) Bill that we have lodged.

In my introductory remarks, I touched on the Scottish Housing Regulator’s new indicators for damp and mould, which I think will help here, and there is a role for the Government to disseminate that information, working with local authorities. After reading the evidence from Tenants Together Scotland and others, I think that there is a role for all of us, whether local authorities or whoever, to ensure that people are aware so that the sort of thing that you have highlighted does not happen and that tenants know that they have the right to have their property repaired in good time. The amendment and the indicators will set a direction of travel by which people will be made aware of their rights, and their behaviours will not be blamed.

There are a number of things to highlight. A key issue is that we were keen to discuss the matter with the United Kingdom Government, and to work very closely together on it. We have certainly had those discussions and have tried to follow what it has been looking at.

As you know, our amendment was lodged on 17 March, and it will be discussed formally at committee. It gives Scottish ministers the power to introduce, through secondary legislation, timescales for social landlords to investigate hazards such as damp and mould and to commence repairs in that respect. It will also allow us to consider additional health-related hazards that should be covered by regulations in Scotland and, again, we will be very much following examples in the rest of the UK.

We have committed to further engagement and consultation across the sector and with tenants prior to the introduction of secondary legislation, and I think that that will be really important. Obviously, we are working with the regulator on the issue, too.

Another key thing will be to set out clearer rules and responsibilities when it comes to investigating and commencing repairs of hazards, although that is probably a matter for the consultation.

A key issue at the moment is, as you have mentioned, enforcing the right. That will also be part of our further engagement, and I am happy to come back to the committee on the matter, either in person or in writing, as we progress our discussions. It is really important that we engage with local authorities and others on what that will actually look like.

Again, it comes back to working with the other stakeholders. We will be working closely with local authorities and other social landlords on that point. I am happy to come back to or to write to the committee on it, but it is part of the further consultation that is already happening.

It is a work in progress.

We must work closely with social landlords on that issue, and we need to ensure that what we are doing is sustainable and realistic. It will very much mirror the UK Government’s approach. I am happy to come back on the specifics, but those discussions and consultations are going on as we speak.

I have been made aware of the concern, and I have asked officials to look into the matter and see whether, if there is a gap in legislation, there is anything that we can do in that respect. I am happy to keep the committee informed on that. I do not know whether Stephen Garvin has anything to add, but we are looking into the issue and we will come back to the committee on it.

Is it okay to make a short statement?

A really important point is that I do not think—I do not expect—that we intend to have a prioritisation process for support under the single building assessment or the single open-call process, but I will have discussions with colleagues on that.

Expressions of interest will be checked against the eligibility criteria, which include residential status, building height and date of construction. If the criteria are met, we will invite owners to apply for Scottish Government support.

You asked about people being dealt with on a first-come, first-served basis. We want to help people as much as we can and as quickly as we can. If an immediate risk is identified, we will pick that up and deal with it as soon as we can. We have allocated an initial £10 million to support the work, and we have set an initial end date for expressions of interest and applications of 30 September.

Beyond that, we will assess the wide range of affected buildings. The first stage is trying to identify them and getting them on to the SBA process. If there are immediate concerns, we will deal with those as soon as we can. There have been 32 expressions of interest in four weeks, so there is interest.

I come back to a point that I have made in the chamber and to the committee: every case is different in terms of the single building assessment, the mediation work that is carried out and the timescales that go beyond that. It is very much a case-by-case basis. If there are immediate risks, we will take action to address them as soon as possible through the SBA process and remediation. I have mentioned the increase in the budget to £52 million this year.

On the point that I made in the chamber about making progress on the SBA process and moving to remediation work as soon as possible, which is an important part of the process, the indicative budget shows that more remediation work will be carried out during this financial year. The number of responses that we have had so far to the single open call is encouraging.

My officials and I engage with local authorities on that point. I can write back to you and the committee about the actions that have been taken in the local authorities that you mentioned. I am happy to take that forward as a point of action and come back to the committee and Ms Gallacher on it.