Chamber and committees

The question is, that amendment 545 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members: No.

The result of the division is: For 1, Against 6, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 545 disagreed to.

Amendment 546 moved—[Maggie Chapman].

There will be a division.

For

Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP)

Against

Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con)
Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)

We will continue. We have nine minutes, so we will move on to the next group, on housing availability. We will probably not get through the whole debate on this group, but I want to maximise the time that we have.

Amendment 223, in the name of Rachael Hamilton, is grouped with amendments 270, 515, 553 and 277.

I think that that is a good point at which to suspend the meeting. We will return at 10 past 3 this afternoon.

Welcome back. I ask Maggie Chapman to speak to amendment 515 and all other amendments in the group.

I will now speak to amendment 553 and other amendments in the group.

Across Scotland, numerous communities and groups, which have place making at their heart, wish to create good-quality community housing. Such projects not only take pressure off taxpayers but can also deliver happier, healthier communities. Too often, the challenge for those groups is getting land. Amendment 553 is intended to make it easier for them to turn the vision of creating a home into reality. Existing legislation requires local authorities to keep registers of those who wish to self-build, but the current register and its associated guidance do not provide enough support to self-build projects. Amendment 553 would change that by reforming the register and its associated processes.

First, it will be open only to local community groups or individuals who plan to live in the house that they build. I have been careful to ensure that commercial developers will not be able to use it as a loophole. Secondly, councils will have to refer to the register whenever they make decisions about planning, housing or land disposal. That requirement will create only a small time and resource burden and will mean that the land supply is matched up with demand. Thirdly, to make the process as simple as possible for councils, I have provided that interested parties are required to ensure that their register entries are up to date. That way, councils do not have to constantly chase up interested parties or rely on what could be an out-of-date register.

Another feature that I have included is a requirement for councils to make a best-value assessment of selling land for self-build, which will allow community housing to scale up more easily, because a project that can prove that it will deliver benefits for the community—for example, by saving the taxpayer money—will be able to access land at a discounted rate. The wording that I have used ensures that the option will not be open to individuals who have to pay market rates. That is very much a first step towards replicating some of the abilities that English and European local authorities have in order to put power into local people’s hands, so that they can create homes in their area that meet their needs.

I hear what the cabinet secretary is saying about the provisions in the 2019 act. However, I have drawn on provisions in the Self-build and Custom Housebuilding Act 2015. I am looking for more support for self-build and custom-build. I am just wondering whether something needs to be looked at in existing legislation. This is all similar to some of the conversations that we have been having during the work on the bill about putting more support into it so that communities can come forward and get land. It is another approach to finding ways of bringing forward the housing that we urgently need.

Good morning, and welcome to the 16th meeting in 2025 of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee. I remind all members and witnesses to ensure that their devices are on silent.

Today’s agenda includes consideration of the Housing (Scotland) Bill at stage 2. We have permission to continue our meeting into the afternoon, so we will be suspending proceedings at around 12:30 until 20 past 2. We might therefore pause item 4 to take item 5 and then return to item 4 after the suspension.

First we have an evidence-taking session on the Town and Country Planning (Fees for Appeals) (Scotland) Regulations 2025 and the Town and Country Planning (Fees for Local Reviews) (Scotland) Regulations 2025.

I welcome to the meeting Ivan McKee, the Minister for Public Finance, who is joined by the following Scottish Government officials: Thomas Barratt, head of development management; Scott Ferrie, deputy director and chief reporter, planning and environmental appeals; Andy Kinnaird, head of transforming planning; and Chris Sinclair, policy manager. Thank you for coming.

We will move to questions from members, and I will start. We have heard from developers that the introduction of fees for planning appeals and reviews could act as a disincentive to development, including the development of much-needed new homes. I would be interested to hear your response to that suggestion, minister.

Okay. Thank you.