Chamber and committees

As you will appreciate, some of the amendments were lodged at a late stage and are quite new. We have been engaging regularly with the group, but some amendments were lodged only a short time ago, and a large number of amendments have been lodged on this part of the bill, as there were on the previous part. It is important that we engage with the PBSA review group on the amendments that have been lodged. I know that we have to be timeous here, so we will need to engage with it as quickly as possible.

I take Mr Simpson’s points on the discussion about the review group. As I said, the review group sets its own agenda. I appreciate the points that have been made on that, and I have offered to work with members both on their individual amendments and collectively.

My work with the PBSA sector is not about hiding behind it but engaging with it—including with the whole range of stakeholders that I have talked about—to make sure that it is comfortable with the amendments that have been lodged. I am not saying that I will not engage; I have already mentioned that I will engage with members both individually, on their amendments, and collectively, on where the PBSA review group is. It is not about hiding behind the review group; it is about ensuring that we get its full views, including from stakeholders from different sectors, students, local authorities, providers and investors. That is not hiding behind the review group but taking cognisance of the importance of its views on where the work is going. It is not about hiding behind anything.

Yes.

I cannot say at this stage what the Government will do in that position. Obviously, that will have to be discussed with colleagues, too. However, it will be really important for me as minister, having heard the consensus that has arisen today, to engage with colleagues in other parties on amendments. We might come to an agreement on that, or not, but that would be a process for stage 3. What I am hearing is a clear consensus coming through on some of these issues, and I think that we need to hear the thoughts and views of the PBSA review group on how we take things forward. The group, which includes all the major stakeholders, will probably come forward with a response, and then it will be for all of us to go away and reflect on what has come out of that engagement. Obviously, that will happen at stage 3.

I understand the comments that have been made, but I cannot speak for previous decisions. The Welsh Government consulted on the issue in 2022 and is talking about beginning a planned revaluation exercise from 2028. Some valuable points have been raised but, as I said, the Scottish Government and COSLA have announced an engagement programme that will seek to build consensus on the issues.

I move on to Ross Greer’s amendment 542, which would require

“a review of the scale and impact of council tax arrears.”

Council tax is a local tax and responsibility for the collection and enforcement of arrears sits, rightly, with local authorities. Councils have the tools that they need to manage arrears, including the discretion to write off debts. In addition, support for financially vulnerable people continues to be provided through the council tax reduction scheme, which benefits 460,000 households across Scotland, with an average saving of £850 per year. The Scottish Government will continue to work with local authorities to explore the best ways to deal with such debt. Therefore, I ask the member not to move amendment 542.

Ross Greer’s amendment 543 would require a review of the impact of joint and several liability for council tax arrears in relation to individuals who are experiencing domestic abuse, with a report to be laid before the Parliament within six months of royal assent to the bill. Joint and several liability is a long-standing feature of council tax collection. It allows local authorities to recover the full amount that is owed from any liable individual, which helps to ensure that local services are funded effectively. However, that can also present difficulties, particularly when domestic abuse is involved, as those cases are often complex. A review would be an opportunity to shed further light on how joint and several liability operates in practice for those who are affected by abuse and, crucially, could help to inform guidance or best practice that might assist local authorities in navigating those situations more effectively. Therefore, I support amendment 543, although I may seek to adjust the timescale at stage 3. I thank Ross Greer for raising that important issue.

Meghan Gallacher’s amendment 132 seeks to apply the additional dwelling supplement to the purchase of three or more dwellings, rather than second homes. That departs from the stated policy intent of the additional dwelling supplement and has the potential to have a significant negative impact on revenues. I cannot support the amendment and ask the member not to move it.

There have not been discussions on specific amendments to the bill. The group has met more generally to discuss some of the recommendations that are being taken forward, and it has continued to meet on that point. I have attended a number of meetings, and there have been similar meetings involving stakeholders. As far as I am aware, there have not been discussions about individual amendments that have been lodged.

Having been involved in the PBSA review group, I know that that is one of the key areas that it is looking at. The local authorities in Edinburgh and Glasgow have worked on that point and considered how it feeds into the wider issues of housing supply and housing strategy. That is a key piece of work that local authorities are doing. The work is on-going, hence I come back to the point about engaging with the PBSA review group on the matter.

You raise important points, but the issue needs further discussion with the review group, which is working on implementation, about the best way to proceed in relation to your amendment.

For me, it comes back to the principle that the PBSA review group is already doing work on implementation. On the amendments that have been lodged, it is important that we engage with that group on where we all go and reach conclusions on what we do at stage 3. That work is on-going. It is important that we engage more collectively and more widely in terms of some of the work that the group is already doing.

I come back to my earlier point that, whatever an amendment is about, it is important that we speak to the sector. If the Government agrees with the points that have been raised, we will look at that. It is important that we engage with the sector before we make any final decisions on what amendments will be lodged at stage 3.

I have indicated that I have some sympathy with some of the amendments. However, some of the other amendments will need to be considered. For example, it is important that the analysis of the notice period surveys is considered before we bring something in at stage 3.

As I said, the review group has been discussing the implementation of the review, and not the bill, in its own particular regard.

I will continue. I mentioned the amendments on terms and conditions. Complaint procedures are also provided—

Mr Balfour, you will be aware of the discussions that are being had. At this stage, we think that that aspect should be dealt with in statutory guidance, but we can discuss that. You mentioned discussions in the future; as I have said, I think that this aspect should be addressed in statutory guidance, but I appreciate your point, and I am happy to pick it up in further discussions.

Amendment 1089, in the name of Katy Clark, would require social landlords, as part of their domestic abuse policy, to consider writing off a tenant’s rent arrears in whole or in part, where those rent arrears have arisen due to domestic abuse. The bill already contains provisions in sections 44 and 45 for social landlords to take action to support tenants with rent arrears arising from domestic abuse. Section 44 creates a pre-action requirement for social landlords to take such action as they consider to be reasonable to support the tenant in those circumstances, having regard to their domestic abuse policy.

Section 45 requires social landlords to have a domestic abuse policy that includes a description of the action that must be taken in relation to the needs of a tenant in such circumstances. Scottish ministers can specify additional pre-action requirements via regulations, which would offer the opportunity to consult social landlords on the proposal. We agree that we can go further with this amendment, but there are some drafting issues with it, and I ask the member to work with me on the matter before stage 3.

Amendment 1024, in the name of Jeremy Balfour, would require a court to delay a social landlord’s right to recover possession by one year and landlords and tenants to agree a reasonable payment plan for future and outstanding rents. Existing statutory provisions already require all social landlords and tenants to make all reasonable efforts to agree a payment plan for future and outstanding rents, and social landlords cannot raise eviction proceedings for rent arrears in court unless those existing statutory provisions have been complied with.

Delaying eviction by one year where domestic abuse is a factor in rent arrears would represent a significant interference in landlords’ property rights. The amendment proposes a blanket ban on eviction for one year, but provisions already in the bill will require the court to consider a delay to the enforcement of eviction in every rent arrears case. Where the court decides that a delay to the enforcement of eviction is appropriate, it will have discretion to determine the length of the delay according to the circumstances of the individual case. Amendment 1024 could be seen as a significant interference in the rights of landlords under amendment 1 of protocol 1 of the European convention on human rights, and it is not clear whether such interference would be proportionate to the aim. I believe that further consultation would be required on that.