Chamber and committees

Mr Choudhury, do you have a final question in relation to how we got here, before we switch to where we go from here?

I think that the question has been asked. I am conscious of time.

I think that we should stick to our inquiry.

Mr McLennan, if you would like to contribute, raise a hand. The clerks will see that and let me know that you are trying to come in.

Mr Ewing, I noticed that you were following that exchange with interest. Would you like to come in?

Yes, it would be helpful if the witnesses could reflect on that, and maybe on the earlier answer as well. We would be very happy to receive any further submission, given that there was some uncertainty beforehand.

Mr Choudhury would like to come in, and I am keen to give him the opportunity to do so.

PE1946, which proposes that the Scottish Government pay all charges for homeless temporary accommodation, has been lodged by Sean Anthony Clerkin. The petition calls on the Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to use general taxation to pay all charges for homeless temporary accommodation, including writing off the £33.3 million debt owed by homeless people for temporary accommodation to local authorities.

We last considered this petition on 3 May 2023, and in its recent response to the committee, the Scottish Government outlined its planned work on two relevant recommendations from the temporary accommodation task and finish group’s report. On recommendation 14, which calls for a benchmarking process for temporary accommodation and greater transparency in charges, the Scottish Government has stated that it will engage with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities as necessary.

As for recommendation 15, which calls for a review of the guidance to local authorities on setting charges for temporary accommodation by clearly defining the terms “reasonable charge” and “affordable”, the housing affordability working group has been developing a shared understanding of housing affordability with a critical review of the main working definitions and their different uses in policy and practice that could help clarify the relevant guidance.

The petitioner points out that there was a 27 per cent increase in households living in temporary accommodation between March 2020 and March 2023. He also notes that local authorities in Edinburgh, Glasgow and Argyll and Bute have declared housing emergencies, and he calls on the committee to pressurise the Scottish Government to act.

Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?

We could also write to the Scottish Government to ask how it intends to address the concerns about those existing households with a debt arising from temporary accommodation charges that have already been accrued. In particular, the committee would, I think, be interested to know how on-going household debt from temporary accommodation aligns with the Government’s priority to reduce the number of households in temporary accommodation by 2026.

Are colleagues content with both those proposals?

Not at all. Thank you very much, Ms Boyack.

You have touched on issues that, as a constituency MSP, I can say have been raised by constituents of mine, too. I would say that there are good and less good factors, and there is good and bad practice. Obviously, constituents tend to contact us when faced with an issue, but I think that the issues that you have raised and touched on are becoming increasingly part of my own casework profile.

I note that we are still waiting for the Scottish Government’s publication, but having heard those remarks and reflected, do colleagues have any comments or suggestions as to how we might proceed?

PE2060, which is to review existing legislation and legal remedies against trespassers, has been lodged by Daithi Broad. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to review and revise existing legislation to offer better protection against trespassers. The SPICe briefing outlines the circumstances in which the public have the right to roam, noting that exceptions to that include domestic houses and gardens.

The briefing also notes that many people incorrectly—I was quite surprised by the briefing, I have to say—believe that the law of trespass does not exist in Scotland. Police Scotland has highlighted difficulties in applying the law in practice. Notably, the police have no jurisdiction, as trespass to land is a civil matter and they cannot assist in the removal of trespassers. Police Scotland’s comments on trespass state that the best and safest course of action is to obtain a court order, which, if breached, may then turn into a criminal matter.

The Scottish Government’s response to the petition also outlined information about the current law on trespassing. In response to the petition’s ask regarding responsibility for injuries on the land, the Scottish Government stated that the duty of care is the same regardless of whether an individual has permission to be on the occupier’s land, but factors such as the foreseeability of unauthorised entry and any steps taken to prevent unauthorised entry and to warn of dangers may be of relevance in determining whether reasonable care has been taken in the particular circumstances. The response also notes that the evidential burden to prove trespass would depend on whether the individual was pursuing a criminal or civil law case.

For my own part, having read the briefing, I think that it is saying that there is little that you could risk doing, particularly in the current climate in which it seems to me that your interests are secondary to those of the people who want to trespass on your property. That is basically how it reads to me. Although we pretend otherwise, the reality is that that is how it will be if you seek to do anything. It is also very difficult, because the briefing does not define what “force” is; I imagine that, if you were to escort somebody off, “force” would now include even laying hands upon somebody, however gently that was done. I found the briefing quite dispiriting. Do colleagues have any suggestions on what we might do?