Chamber and committees

I am delighted to be able to do so, Presiding Officer. I have taken part in housing debates in the chamber over many years, and during those debates, I have often taken the opportunity to reflect on my own experience of renting a home.

I have known good landlords who act responsibly, but I have also known high rents and poor maintenance. I have been harassed out of a flat by an abusive landlord, and I can still remember the shock, when I could eventually afford to buy a home, of learning just how much more I had been paying to rent a room and kitchen than it cost to have a mortgage on an entire two-bedroom flat. I know very well, from personal experience, that Scotland’s tenants need a new deal. I am delighted that I now have the opportunity to propose action to Parliament.

The 700,000 people who rent privately need a new deal to give them the freedom to turn a house into a home, to better protect them from eviction, to challenge excessive rents and to assure them that authorities will take action if their landlord steps over the line.

More than 1 million people who rent from a council, a housing association or a co-operative need a new deal to continue to improve access to housing and to drive up standards, as we tackle the twin challenges of fuel poverty and climate change.

Together, all the people who rent need a new deal that helps them be better informed, more meaningfully engaged and better able to exercise their rights—a new deal that centres firmly on housing as a human right. That is why the draft new deal for tenants that we announced yesterday is a new deal for all tenants. It is also why “Housing to 2040”, which was published earlier this year, pledged to develop a whole rented sector strategy. The draft new deal for tenants also incorporates all the ambitions for the rented sector that were set out in the shared policy programme between the Scottish Government and the Scottish Greens.

For work of that scale of ambition, we need to hear from many perspectives. Over the past few months, I have met senior councillors and staff, tenants unions, landlords, housing associations, campaigners and letting agents. However, above all, the Government needs to hear more from tenants. That is why we are working with the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, whose expertise has been very helpful in enabling us to engage with private rented sector tenants.

I have already committed to establishing a tenant participation panel for the private rented sector—it will be the first of its kind—to ensure that tenants’ voices are front and centre. I am also seeking views on how we can support the development of tenants unions and other ways of engaging with tenants. Early in the new year, we will launch a new publicity campaign to make sure that tenants know their rights.

I believe that a whole sector approach is required so that all tenants can expect value for money and good housing standards. Housing systems are integrated, and neighbourhoods and even buildings are mixed—each sector can learn from the other. However, I recognise that, for private renters in particular, there is a power imbalance where tenants are less able to exercise their rights and continue to have less secure tenancies than those in the social sector. Therefore, many of the specific policy proposals that I am seeking views on in the consultation relate to private renting.

That is why I have set out proposals for the introduction of a new housing bill in the second year of this parliamentary session and a new regulator for the private rented sector to enforce standards. We will also work towards a national system of rent controls for the private rented sector by beginning to put in place the evidence framework that is needed.

However, I know that there is more to be done for social tenants, too, so we are also consulting on a number of things to support them. They include creating a new housing standard, regulating to set minimum standards for energy efficiency and zero emissions heating for all homes, and exploring what further action we can take to ensure that rents in the social rented sector are affordable.

It is very clear that rent pressure zones have not been used anywhere by any local authority. One of the issues is that the burden of responsibility is on local authorities to come forward with evidence. I hope that, even if the Conservatives do not ultimately support the proposals on rent controls, they will support the action that we need to take to gather the evidence and data that are required to design a good system.

If I have time for one more intervention, I will.

I am grateful for that, Presiding Officer.

Bob Doris makes very fair points, and I hope that such arguments will come across in the consultation responses. Tenants’ voices are critical if we are to shift some of the power imbalances and address some of the injustices that exist. Hearing those voices can now be better organised in many places in the social rented sector, but there is still scope to do things better and to learn from best practice. I hope that people will take the consultation as an opportunity to put forward constructive ideas for how to achieve that.

I am seeking views on existing private rented tenancies and the grounds for repossession, and I am exploring how tenants can feel more at home in their rented property through simple things such as being able to decorate or keep pets. Those things might be seen as trivial by some people, but they are critical to the feeling that a house is a home and to supporting people’s wellbeing and mental health.

I am proposing new restrictions on evictions in winter. There are a number of questions around defining how that will work, on which we want to hear views. That is in addition to ensuring that the penalties for illegal evictions in the private sector are a meaningful deterrent.

I am highlighting the need to help people who live in non-traditional rented accommodation—from student accommodation to residential mobile homes, and from the Gypsy Traveller community to people in agricultural tenancies.

It is right to raise standards, but it is just as important to ensure that renting is affordable. On average, people who rent privately spend more of their income—more than a quarter of it, and for some, much more than that—on rent.

The social rented sector already has some safeguards in place to protect tenants from high rent rises, and all the money from rents should be reinvested for the good of tenants. The position is inconsistent, to say the least, in the private rented sector, where approaches to rent setting can vary dramatically among landlords. We are therefore consulting on how to introduce an effective national system of rent controls by 2025 for privately rented homes, with appropriate mechanisms to allow local authorities to introduce local measures.

I recognise that campaigners for that policy are impatient; some people even argue that we should use emergency coronavirus legislation to bypass the need to consult. I do not agree with that. The Scottish Parliament has always consulted before legislating, where that is possible, and that is as it should be: it helps us to make better law. The weakness of the 2016 reform to create rent pressure zones is a warning about legislation that is developed swiftly without adequate testing or dialogue.

I want the new system to be one that works for the long term. That means collecting the information that we need, learning from what works well elsewhere and taking the time to get it right. We will improve the collection of data on rents and other factors in the private rented sector so that we have the evidence needed to inform an effective system. A more detailed consultation on rent control will follow later in the session, as we gather that evidence and as building the evidence base picks up pace. At the same time, we will consider how best to share good practice and improve affordability in the social rented sector, too.

Affordability and supply are of course closely linked, and I know that Parliament will support my commitment to our expanded programme of building 110,000 affordable homes, 70 per cent of them being for social rent, by 2032. That programme is on a larger scale than any for decades, and I am determined to work with colleagues across both Government and Parliament to ensure that every contribution counts—public, private, community and third sector—in achieving that goal.

New homes for rent are rightly a major theme in the new deal for tenants, but most of the homes that we will live in in 2040 are already here today. That is why we are seeking views on how we can improve quality and raise standards across the whole rented sector, both in physical buildings and in the services that are provided to all tenants. With that in mind, I am seeking views on establishing a new housing standard for all homes.

I could say more. There is a great deal to do, and a great deal of work ahead of us throughout this session of Parliament. There will be no shortage of views, and the consultation is open for the next 16 weeks, so that everyone can engage on the wide-ranging and ambitious aims of this agenda.

I believe that the draft strategy will deliver a new deal for tenants, with stronger rights, greater protections against eviction and access to better, more affordable homes. That will help us to deliver a fairer Scotland, to tackle child poverty and to meet our climate change targets.

I urge MSPs across the chamber to support that ambition, to contribute their ideas and to join me in welcoming this new deal for tenants.

I move,

That the Parliament notes the publication of the consultation on A New Deal for Tenants, which seeks views on the Scottish Government’s ambitious plans for the rented sector; agrees that the 1.85 million people who live in the rented sector should have improved quality, standards and rights in the place they call home; supports the aims of A New Deal for Tenants to ensure tenants have more secure and stable tenancies, flexibility to personalise their homes, improved safeguards against eviction, improved regulation and effective national rent controls in the private sector; recognises that this strategy will support progress towards the human right of an adequate home for all, and welcomes, therefore, this draft strategy seeking to make renting a home more affordable, safer, with a higher quality, better managed and more secure.

I need to move on, I am afraid.

I come to Labour’s position. I recognise the long-standing case for intervention that has been made by Labour colleagues. I believe that our intention to lay the framework for the data collection machinery that we need will start to build on that case. That is what is to be proposed in the year 2 housing bill. From my exchange with Mark Griffin early in the debate, I understood that that was the intention of his amendment, and I will support it on that basis.

It is clear that, if we are to take action, we need to take the time to get the detail right. Some elements of what is proposed in the strategy will take until 2025—near the end of this parliamentary session. Other measures, such as those on rent adjudication, will happen much earlier. I hope that we will continue to work with Labour colleagues on that. In addition, I recognise Pauline McNeill’s long-standing work on the issue, and I thank her for the opportunity to work constructively on it, as I will be very happy to do.

We must be clear. This is not about saying, “No change until 2025”—far from it. It is about saying that a schedule of work will begin in the short term and will work through to 2025—for example, on pre-action protocols, as Mark Griffin also mentioned.

There is a review of student accommodation. I will write to Pauline McNeill with more detail on that.

In the Liberal Democrat contribution, Willie Rennie recognised the level of cold, damp, overpriced properties that are still out there—the reality of the problems that the strategy seeks to address. A lot of his focus was on social renting. Pre-pandemic, we were clearly on track to meet the target for delivery for social housing. The pandemic has provided a massive challenge to everybody when it comes to the construction sector, but the 110,000 homes target is a clear commitment. As far as I understand Willie Rennie’s amendment, he does not seek to up that figure to an arbitrary and unfunded target but to put pressure on us to deliver the target to which we have committed. On that basis, I will support the amendment.

A number of countries, including some in Europe, have a system of rent controls and are not seeking to abolish it, and they are not saying that it has had huge unintended consequences. What about the consequence of not acting? Mr Balfour and I both represent cities that are seeing wildly disproportionate, way-above-inflation rent increases. Do we simply not act and allow that to happen?

There are contesting analyses of how we look at that budget. That is always the case. Pretty much every year, political parties, analysts and others try to cut and slice the budget in different ways, in order to present their own particular preference.

I will touch on the point of disagreement about rent controls. Miles Briggs asked what assessment had already taken place. We are not yet at the point of having a fully developed proposal on rent controls, but we recognise the depth of the problem and the need for it to be addressed. We are open to hearing all points of view on the particular design of a rent control system. We have been very clear. We need to gather far more data—detailed data—on rent levels and on the other aspects of the private rented sector before we are able to design and present finalised proposals on that. We will keep an open mind.

Miles Briggs rose—

I will take one more intervention, if I have time.

I will come on to winter evictions later. As Pam Duncan-Glancy knows, some of the temporary coronavirus pandemic measures around discretion at the tribunal are to be made permanent. I hope that she understands that I am not able to comment on court actions.

I will take another intervention—this time from the back of the chamber.

I would like to support the Labour amendment, if I understand its meaning correctly. When Mr Griffin says that the framework needs to be brought forward in the year 2 bill, is he referring—I hope that he is—to the need to generate the data that is required to understand the matter and to design a proper system? We will not be able to implement the rent control system in year 2, but we will put in place the framework for collection of data. If that is what he means, I very much welcome his position and would like to support his amendment.