Chamber and committees

Will the minister take an intervention?

I am not sure that the minister is really understanding where the policy sits, because 80 per cent of people in Edinburgh have not applied. If he thinks that that is indicative of a great scheme that is fit for purpose and is delivering, he is wrong. Those people have decided not to apply for a reason.

We are already seeing the impact of bed nights being withdrawn. The cost of staying in the capital during the festival was at its highest ever this year. In addition, the number of properties being listed for let in the capital has dropped to a record low, from 8,307 to 7,993. That is concerning. As I have said, the City of Edinburgh Council says that it expects an 80 per cent reduction in short-term lets in the city. Local authority registers are indicating that 84 per cent of all types of short-term lets have not applied in Scotland. In Edinburgh, the figure was 97 per cent. That is an unsustainable position and the policy is failing. It is not only a housing policy failure, but is a failure for the tourism potential that we want to grow and improve.

The fact is that SNP MSPs and MPs do not seem to understand who is being captured by the policy. As I said earlier, Tommy Sheppard has said that

“This isn’t about home sharing”,

but it most definitely is, and that group is captured. It is about the most basic of economic principles: supply and demand. If there are fewer rooms available, there will be higher costs for anyone who is wanting to spend time in Scotland. As every speaker has said during the debate, no one is against regulation, and health and safety should be—and I believe is, in the vast majority of cases—paramount for anyone who is operating in the sector. They want people to have a safe stay either in their home or in the property that they are letting out.

As Murdo Fraser stated:

“A well-regulated short-term lets sector is a social good. It is important not just to tourists ... but to many other sectors of society, including commercial travellers”,

such as people going to the Western Isles to work, as well as people in the capital.

The debate presents the Parliament with an opportunity to pause the introduction of the legislation and urgently to reassess its impacts—not only on the tourism sector, but on the wider economy and people’s lives during the cost of living crisis. The debate is not about inflicting a defeat on the Government; it is about the Parliament delivering workable legislation and good governance.

Ministers acknowledging when they have got something wrong is not weak—it is strong. I hope that both the ministers who have spoken in the debate have taken away from it the need to do something, and not just to move forward without taking on board the real concerns. The short-term lets legislation is not going to help to solve the housing crisis in Scotland. What it will do is drive a crisis in the Scottish tourism sector, for which the Government will be responsible. SNP ministers should take the opportunity that we have brought to Parliament to pause the regulations and to take part in meaningful engagement in order to arrive at a proportionate, fair and legally sound legislative framework that works for everyone in Scotland.

I support the motion in Murdo Fraser’s name.

Does anyone else want to come in?

Thank you for that, but I suppose that my point was really about the workforce in rural communities. For example, is the Government looking at an uplift in the low-carbon heat skills grant for rural apprenticeships and specifically for small to medium-sized enterprises, which will potentially have to let individuals go and do training and will therefore need to get extra cover or to find out how that will work for them and their business? What work is going on in that respect, given that the once-for-Scotland approach does not necessarily seem to be working for SMEs and for rural Scotland? What about the additional costs of transport for students going to rural colleges or, indeed, places such as Edinburgh where capacity seems to be building quickly?

My question is on a completely separate point regarding the cost implications for consumers—in particular, the estimate of an additional £30,000 on the cost of a new-build home with a heat pump. The Scottish Government has taken away much of what was in the help-to-buy schemes. Is there a need to develop something completely new in that respect to support people—potentially to cover that part of the additional cost of housing for people who are getting on to the property ladder?

Good morning, everyone. I am a Conservative MSP for the Lothian region.

I want to ask a few questions about skills and the impact on developers. We have heard consistently about the pressures on the workforce that developers are experiencing. Is there a sufficient skilled workforce in Scotland to facilitate the introduction of the new-build heat standards?

I will bring in Duncan Sharp, as I want to start with the low-carbon skills grant that is available for heating and plumbing apprenticeships. Has that made a difference?

I will bring in Fionna Kell on developers.

In September 2019, the Government stated its intention to regulate new build in the way that is set out in the regulations. However, the pandemic had an impact and led to a delay in the regulations being laid.

Has the construction sector in general had enough time to plan for the regulations? I refer not just to the workforce challenges but to how the regulations will completely change how you sell and hand over a home.

Thanks. Does anyone else want to comment on that point?