Chamber and committees

In relation to the debate yesterday, recommendations were made, but there is a clear disconnect with regard to the implementation of the recommendations on children in temporary accommodation. That is on the back of the 2023 outcomes set by the Scottish Government. We need to look at those specific issues, and it is incumbent on the Government to do so and see whether something can be brought back at stage 3, because it is clear that what the Government is doing just now is not working. The amendments in the group have been lodged, because there is a significant problem with children living in temporary accommodation in Scotland, and we need legislation that will help solve that problem.

The points that have been raised in relation to data are very important with regard to different categories of persons who could be impacted. I wonder whether the Government might want to explore that further with members, looking toward stage 3. Members have referred to particular groups, but I am certain that there are probably more groups that have not been identified in committee.

The amendments raise a lot of concerns regarding strategy and whether various groups of people need direct support and therefore need to be included in the legislation. Perhaps the minister can expand on those points, because I believe that they are important. Care-experienced young people fall into a different category, right enough, given that we already have the Promise, which all political parties signed up to and endorsed and which they continue to support.

Roz McCall’s comments about how we need to do more are bang on. Housing is critical to ensuring that we deliver the Promise by its benchmark target dates, so amendments that would promote that and allow those targets to be met should be welcomed and supported.

That is all that I have to say just now, but I am interested in the aspects around the amendments in this group, and I think that other discussions might need to be had.

Will the minister take an intervention?

There are two housing waiting lists—a general waiting list and the homelessness waiting list. Given the minister’s local government background, how does he think that Kevin Stewart’s amendments would work in practice, should they be agreed to? Do they relate to the concerns that the councils raised in the short consultation that the Government carried out? If so, that would need to be looked at. That relates to Jeremy Balfour’s contributions on strengthening those elements. The minister would need to take a serious look at how the housing waiting list system works.

I hear what the member is saying but I think that it comes down to what it looks like in practice. We know that councils have vast numbers of people who are stranded, languishing on waiting lists up and down the country. As Jeremy Balfour rightly pointed out, amendment 1052 would mean moving to one waiting list, and that would change the whole structure of the housing list system and how it functions. Would it be the case that people who desperately need help might not be able to get that help because of the new system and what it could look like within the scope of what is being asked in the amendments? That is something that we all have to watch out for.

Again, I am not saying that the issue should not be looked at, but we should look for the unintended consequences that could come from the amendments in this group. I believe that we need to know what it would look like in practice before we progress.

Given the responses to amendments this morning at the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, I am not sure that what the minister says is quite accurate. Fife Council underspent its housing budget by almost £9 million this year, despite declaring a housing emergency a year ago. Included in that £9 million was £3.5 million for the property acquisition programme. Acquisition plays a key role in any council’s housing approach, but it does not necessarily add properties to the overall stock. Will the minister engage with council officials to ensure that all levers are available to local government to prevent slippage? Will he also give an update on the roll-out of the planning hubs? We have not heard much about those since the Government’s announcement.

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the findings of the fatal accident inquiry for Lea Lamont, Ellie McCormick, and Mira-Belle Bosch, published on 14 March 2025, which suggest that the three child fatalities were avoidable.

A written response from the cabinet secretary would be greatly appreciated.

Following the reviews that were conducted by the fatal accident inquiry, and its findings, there will be significant concern, anxiety and anticipation among women and families who are expecting. Can the Scottish Government provide assurance on the additional measures that are being considered to enhance that patient safety—I understand that the cabinet secretary has just outlined some of those—to improve oversight and address staffing levels in our maternity and neonatal services in order to alleviate those concerns?

The cabinet secretary has provided a timescale for that, but could he also consider whether any changes that have been made to neonatal services, in particular in relation to the downgrading at Wishaw general hospital, can also be taken into consideration, given the findings of the fatal accident inquiry?

It has been 10 months since the Scottish Government was forced into declaring a housing emergency. Local councils, of course, followed suit, referencing the growing number of people declaring themselves as homeless and the fact that they have to place families in temporary accommodation as they do not have the supply to meet demand. At the same time, measures such as the introduction of rent controls have led to £3.2 billion of lost investment, with a significant drop in house building. Something has gone dreadfully wrong, and I have no confidence that this Government will be able to produce a plan that will tackle the housing emergency before the end of this parliamentary session.

Scottish Labour has rightly focused its debate today on the impacts of temporary accommodation and the affect that it has on children and young people.

Will the minister accept any responsibility for the actions of his Government that have led to a housing emergency and the issues of temporary accommodation for children?