Chamber and committees

The new building regulations are broadly in line with the proposition that was consulted on, and the response to the consultation was supportive of the general approach that we are taking.

Dr Garvin might wish to add something about the origin and why 11m was considered as part of the development of the proposal.

The current standards resulted from a specific review of the type of cladding materials that have been causing the most significant concern since Grenfell, and the specific changes in this set of regulations will address those issues. Nonetheless, it is clear that the wider transformation of the energy performance of our homes needs to be undertaken in a way that is not only safe in terms of fire risk, but which contributes to healthy air quality in buildings and addresses direct energy issues. I do not know whether Steven Scott or Stephen Garvin wants to add anything from an energy or fire perspective.

The standard introduces a requirement to mitigate the risk of summer overheating in new homes and new residential buildings that are used in a similar way. We are aware that that is a lower risk in Scotland than in other parts of the UK, but it is important that we establish that overheating can be considered a risk in new build, and that we examine how to mitigate the likely impacts of our future climate.

The initial provisions take a fairly simple approach, focusing on the issues of heat gain through windows and the removal of heat build-up through effective ventilation. There is also an option to model the risk for more unusual or highly glazed building types. Designers will address that by limiting excessive heat gained through the location and specification of windows and by improving the ventilation of buildings. Those measures will provide occupiers with more assurance that their homes are warm and easy to heat, but also comfortable in the summer months.

Our proposal is that, under the 2024 new-build heat standard, direct emissions heating systems will no longer be permitted in new buildings. A further consultation this summer will set out details of plans to remove gas, oil and biofuel boilers as options from 2024. The 2022 regulations still permit the construction of new homes with those heating systems, but they set more challenging overall emissions and energy performance targets. The 2022 standards will ask for any building with a direct emissions heating system to be designed for a simple future retrofit and the installation of a zero direct emissions source, with information on that option to be provided to the owner.

From this year, wet heating systems in all new buildings should be designed to operate at lower temperatures to optimise the efficient operation of zero direct emissions systems such as heat pumps in the future.

Once again, I turn to my officials for support on the detailed aspects of that question.

Again, I will ask David Blair to respond.

Will the member take an intervention?

I put it to the member that that is a slight overreaction to the measures in the bill. Pre-action protocols are already standard practice; they are required in the social rented sector and we have been told that they are best practice in the private rented sector. As for making repossession grounds discretionary, none of that prevents any landlord from seeking repossession; it means only that their circumstances and those of their tenant will all be taken into account when the decision is made.

Christine Grahame is not the only one who was slightly surprised at the lack of action in the Queen’s speech today on the cost of living crisis. She is right to point to action on unclaimed and underclaimed benefits as a very obvious thing that could be done to maximise household incomes. We need to make sure that people are accessing the money that they are entitled to.

It is a disgrace that there is £1.7 billion—that is the figure that I have, but if it is £1.8 billion I stand to be corrected—sitting in UK Government coffers instead of in the pockets and purses of pensioners who need it so badly.

The Scottish Government will continue to place an emphasis on income maximisation schemes, and there is a great deal that we can do to support people to have the information that they need about the benefits that they are entitled to. I hope that the UK Government will take similar action.

It is a matter of fact that the powers to regulate energy markets remain reserved. For example, the proposal for a £1,000 cut to energy bills that came forward from the Scottish Power chief executive in his recent interview is deliverable only through the powers that rest with the UK Government. We have repeatedly called on it to take other actions, including a temporary cut in energy bills through VAT, a review of the levies on bills, action on the warm home discount scheme and the creation of a four-nations discussion to develop an effective response to the energy bill increases.

The Scottish Government is disappointed that the UK Government has failed to support hard-pressed households and to engage with us multilaterally to achieve more, such as could be achieved with a one-off windfall tax on excessive profits in the oil and gas industry or anywhere else. That scale of work is needed, and I hope that the UK Government feels that it is not too late to change direction and listen to such proposals.