Chamber and committees

Will the member give way?

If the policy is working so well, why have 80 per cent of people not applied to register under the scheme? What is the Government going to do about that in the next two weeks?

Last week, I and other MSPs—from all the Opposition parties, anyway—met protesters outside Parliament. Welcoming constituents to Parliament is something that we do most week. However, that day was different because the people whom I met outside Parliament had never previously protested in their lives. They were hard-working law-abiding Scottish citizens who have been running bed and breakfasts and guest houses or renting out a room to tourists or workers for years. I welcome many of them to the gallery today.

They felt compelled to come to Parliament to try to speak to ministers and MSPs from the SNP and Green Parties to get them to listen—which is what we are trying to do today, too—to their real concerns on how the short-term lets policy that councils have implemented will negatively impact the lives and businesses of so many of our fellow citizens. Last Wednesday, SNP and Green ministers ignored them, with the honourable exception of Fergus Ewing MSP. I pay tribute to him for his principled stance and for his campaigning on that issue, which I am sure ministers have faced and to which I wish they would listen.

During the passage of the short-term lets legislation through the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee, ministers were warned about the unintended consequences of the wide-ranging reach of the policy, especially around the hard date of 1 October for registration. We offered to work with Shona Robison, who was the cabinet secretary at the time, to try to find a cross-party consensus and workable approach to legislation, regulations and guidance, which has now been issued several times to councils across the country. Behind the scenes, the new housing minister, who understood at the time that problems were clearly on the horizon, did the same.

I welcomed the six-month extension to the policy and hoped that ministers would use the summer to understand the problems and issues, and bring forward workable suggestions to Parliament before the 1 October deadline—especially following the ruling that the City of Edinburgh Council’s licensing policy was found, on judicial review, to be unlawful.

As Daniel Johnson mentioned, linking planning systems and licensing systems was always going to be problematic, but ministers do not seem to understand the consequences thereof. Ministers were warned that, without a significant advertising campaign, the busy summer period and any other tourism period that individual households and businesses face in Scotland would not give them the time to complete applications, undertake work, get tradespeople and provide the necessary documentation. Sue Webber and Christine Grahame made really important points on that issue from constituents who are saying exactly that to each and every one of us.

For example, if they wanted to, ministers could agree on a new phased introduction beyond 1 October—they could do so today. I hope that they will take that point away and genuinely consider it beyond tonight’s vote. Giving businesses, bed and breakfasts, guest houses and people who do home sharing a phased introduction period beyond 1 October is important.

The Edinburgh festivals, which the tourism minister has not mentioned, are the world’s largest arts festivals, and have rightly helped to make Edinburgh the world capital of culture, which I welcome. I think that every MSP who represents the capital has mentioned that point. Those unrivalled cultural programmes deliver a major economic uplift to businesses, jobs and livelihoods across the capital and further afield in our country. Cities around the world that are growing their arts festivals would give their right arms to become as successful as the Edinburgh festivals have been. Indeed, many will be looking on at the potential impact of the regulations on next year’s festival to see how they can benefit in trying to become the world’s largest arts festival.

It is clear that ministers understood the negative impact and the consequences of the short-term lets legislation on this year’s festival when they announced the delayed date of 1 October to get the festival through this year.

The minister will recognise the name Avril Rennie, because she won the title of Scottish bed and breakfast of the year. He wrote to congratulate her at the Carlton Seamill B and B in Ayrshire. She says that the system in Ayrshire is too complex and costly and she is not likely to apply for it. There is a need to take a phased approach beyond the 1 October deadline. Does the minister understand that, and is the Government going to do anything about it or will it just wait for 1 October and that cliff edge for many businesses and people?

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.