Chamber and committees

I know that the minister is going to outline a way forward, but I am trying to understand his argument. Is it his argument that student halls of residence should not be subject to rent control rules because they might be rented or let out to people other than students at some point during the year?

I have not studied the standing orders recently, so I will take Mr Johnson’s word for it. However, today, the committee members, who will have to vote on the amendments, are in a very tricky position. The members who are proposing amendments have given a great deal of thought to them, but the minister does not appear to have done so. He is hiding behind the review group, which, as Mr Greer said, reported 15 months ago.

That is correct. It is absolutely right.

That is also correct. When I came to discuss this group having had a very brief chat with the minister, I was minded, as I often am, to work with him and allow him to do his consultation, but I am afraid that I have changed my mind. If I was a committee member with a vote, I would vote for many of the amendments in this group in order to put the minister in a position where he has to deal with them. Whether or not you agree with the individual amendments, the minister has to be forced to the table.

It may be uncomfortable for the minister, who I like personally and who knows that, as I have said it many times, but if that does not happen, he will hide behind the review group, the can will get kicked down the road, no amendments will be agreed to at this stage nor at stage 3, and—to answer the point made by Mr Greer, who is realistic enough to know this—we will end up with a bill that does not address student housing, guarantors or the issues that were raised by Ms Duncan-Glancy.

In my view, the minister has got himself into a position that he should, frankly, not be in. That is because he has not given any guarantees that he will work with people with a view to bringing forward amendments at stage 3—I notice that he is not intervening, so he must agree with that point.

I share Ms Gallacher’s frustrations. The committee and, indeed, the minister are in a pretty astonishing position. Some members may be wondering what to do. The minister has not been clear at all, but I am clear that the committee needs to think tactically. I should not be speaking in those terms: we should just know what to do, but I think that committee members need to vote for most of the amendments in the group, unless they are ideologically opposed to them, which they may be. I think that the minister needs to be brought to the table. Despite my suggestion to the minister in our private conversation that he ought to bring parties and MSPs together to discuss what we could do at stage 3, he has not offered that—he has not offered anything.

But when you have looked at colleges, for instance, you have looked at the condition of the estate, too. You have mentioned that in previous reports.

Just one more, actually. It relates to your planned audit on best value in policing, Auditor General, which you are going to do in conjunction with His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland. Our predecessor committee, in its legacy report, said:

“The Committee is strongly of the view that there needs to be a full and comprehensive review of police governance and accountability arrangements.”

Will you look at that, and how will you work with HM Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland?

Thank you. I am looking forward to seeing that piece of work.

Moving on to something else, I note that you are doing an audit of resilience in flooding. That will certainly be of interest to other members; I know from chatting earlier that Mr Beattie has a case study that he might want to mention, and Mr McMillan has a case study on his patch, too. Indeed, the convener and I have a great interest in the big scheme that is being planned for Grangemouth.

What level of detail will you be going into in that piece of work? Will you be looking at individual schemes such as Grangemouth, for example, which is going to use a lot of public money? How will the work link with your planned work on climate change? Will you be looking at case studies and examples of work that has already been done, and will you be looking at things that you think have worked and things that have not?

Auditor General, I notice that one of the audits that you are due to publish in May will be on the Scottish National Investment Bank, which, since it was formed in November 2020, has had two permanent chief executives and an interim one. The current chief executive is about to retire, which means that the bank will soon be on its fourth chief executive in less than five years. That is an issue.

I know that you cannot tell us exactly what will be in the audit, but I wonder what level of detail it will go into. Are you looking at individual investments made by the bank and the value for money that they represent? Is that the kind of thing you are looking at?

Okay. So you will be looking at things such as the condition of the police estate, and what are, in a lot of cases, crumbling police stations—