Chamber and committees

It would be good to understand that.

I want to pick up on a few points. In the Parliament, we hear quite a bit about co-design from the Government. This may just be a comment, but we hear “co-design” and then we hear “dissatisfaction”, not just on this committee or on this particular issue. Before I got this job, I used to do design thinking. Is something in the co-design process causing that dissatisfaction? Is there a process that is clearly laid out for the people that you are working with? The double diamond process is an example of a model that gets used a lot. Do people really understand the process that you are taking them through?

Another point is that people are burnt out with consultation. We have heard from colleagues elsewhere that people do not feel as if they are really being heard. It goes beyond being listened to. It is one thing to be listened to, but it is another thing to be heard—you see that there is an outcome because somebody has heard what you have to say.

There is something interesting in there about process, and it leads on to my next point. Last night, the cross-party group on crofting met. The suckler beef SSI came up again as a concern, as well as general concern about the design and roll-out of the system. SSIs are coming—potentially, they will be coming thick and fast; we are not sure—and we do not have a lot of time to scrutinise them.

Minister, it was good to hear that you have visited crofters and built those connections and relationships. I want to get a sense that you are working with crofters, and other farmers before the committee even sees the SSIs—“behind the curtain”, as I would put it—so that people have time to contribute to the co-design in a genuine way. Last night, quite a bit of concern was expressed about that in relation to crofters’ experience.

It was on headage, which you covered, convener.

I am glad that Dave Reay mentioned the RLUPs, because I have a note that I took earlier in the conversation that says “Working at scale?” I have a good and constructive RLUP in the north-west and one thing that comes up when I talk to it is the need for what I call soft infrastructure, by which I mean something that is Government-funded that involves people who have the skills to convene the large-scale landscape groups. What do you think about that idea for speeding up the process? I hear your frustration on the RLUPs, but do we need to have that infrastructure of people who are not managing the land but who have the skills to project manage and bring everyone together?

It seems that we may need to do that, as Denmark has. If we were to bring in something like that, would we need a database? How would we deal with that?

The last topic is knowledge transfer and capacity building. Mike Robinson said that education is the biggest skills deficit in every sector. David McKay talked about peer-to-peer learning and the tiny amount of money for that in tier 4, which needs to be increased. Dave Reay also talked about that.

The 2020 update to the climate change plan talks about all the different things that the Government is focusing on, such as communication methods, using technology and media to best effect, how to get the information over and how to build capacity in farmers. We have talked about peer-to-peer knowledge transfer and David McKay talked about farmer-led clusters. What mechanisms should be used to facilitate knowledge transfer between research institutions, policy makers and the farming community to meet the climate and adaptation goals? I am asking not necessarily about farmer-to-farmer knowledge transfer but about how we get what Vera Eory has talked about all morning to farmers through policy makers.

Specifically on the issue of getting crofters behind the curtain and co-designing—

I understand that it is not easy, but I am also a bit concerned about the fact that that is all in your thinking—I hope that it has been disseminated across your team.

Okay, but how do you make sure that what people such as that farmer say when they meet you feeds into the co-design of the policy that will affect them on the ground in the future? It is one thing to meet people, but how do you ensure that that shows up in the policy?

The next item on our agenda is an evidence-taking session as part of our work on building safety and maintenance. We will be hearing this morning from two panels of witnesses.

For the first panel, we are joined in the room by Sean Clerkin, who is campaign co-ordinator at the Scottish Tenants Organisation; Yvette Hoskins, who is vice-chair of the Dundee RAAC campaign group; and Emma Saunders, who is the national organiser at Living Rent. We are also joined online by Aoife Deery, who is a senior social justice policy officer at Citizens Advice Scotland, and Shona Gorman, who is vice-chair of Tenants Together Scotland.

Before I turn to questions from members, I should point out that we have read in the press this morning that the Scottish Government has announced its intention to lodge amendments on damp and mould to the Housing (Scotland) Bill. We do not know the detail of those amendments yet, but it is still important that we have our conversation today, as it will, I hope, help the Government in that respect.

We will direct our questions to specific witnesses initially, but if you would like to come in, please indicate as much to the clerks. Aoife and Shona, you should do so by typing an R in the chat function. One less thing for you to think about is operating the microphones—we will do that for you.

Finally, before I begin with some initial questions about tenants’ experience and landlord practice, I should say that the session will be split into questions on damp and mould—those issues will be the primary focus for our first few questions—and questions on reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete. You might feel initially that we are not asking any questions that are relevant to your specific area, but we will definitely have questions for you.

As the first question is really for Citizens Advice Scotland, I will direct it to Aoife Deery, but it is also for Living Rent, Tenants Together Scotland and the Scottish Tenants Organisation. I am just cueing you up, Aoife, because I am interested in hearing how, from the work that you have been doing, you think the volume of tenant complaints about damp and mould in their homes has changed over the past couple of years.