Chamber and committees

We are seeing a historic shift in population in Scotland—from west to east. By 2040, Lothian councils are set to see the largest percentage increase in our populations, and Midlothian is projected to see an increase of more than 30 per cent in its population. Therefore, the Scottish Government and public bodies need to plan now for the increased pressures that our public services will face.

As I said, 84 per cent of Scottish population growth is due to be based in my region over the next 10 years, so it is time for ministers to understand that we need to plan for that population growth and development.

Will the minister agree to take forward a cross-party summit with MSPs and public bodies, so that we can look now at the future challenges and opportunities that will face public services across the Lothian region?

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment the ministerial task force on population has made of the reported population increase in Edinburgh and the south-east, including any proposals that it has made to address this, since it was established in June 2019. (S6O-03703)

In 2012, ministers put in place a chief executive letter for hospices across Scotland. That resulted in a welcome situation, with the Government and the hospices mutually agreeing a funding calculation of 50 per cent of agreed costs. Since the integration of health and social care, the letter is now not taken into account and that figure has collapsed to around 25 to 28 per cent of costs for hospices across Scotland. That needs to change. What future models of funding will the Scottish Government look at to ensure that we have a built-in mechanism to take into account the increased pay and additional costs that the whole hospice sector faces?

I thank my colleague Graham Simpson for bringing this important debate to the chamber. I also thank the organisations that provided members with helpful briefings for it. I pay tribute to Graham Simpson and Ben Macpherson for their campaigning work on tenement issues, and to the Parliament’s cross-party group on housing that has also been working on those issues—it is important that we then debate those issues in the chamber.

When I was first elected eight years ago, one of my early cases concerned stair cleaning in a tenement here in the capital. There was an issue with shared payments towards communal cleaning and maintenance. To some extent, eight years on, it does not feel as though we have made any progress on such matters. That case provided me with a good, early lesson on the legal pitfalls and problems that people who live in tenements often face and on the need for organised and legal frameworks to improve conditions in all tenements across Scotland for the people who call them home.

As the motion notes, there is a pressing need for solutions to be developed, as was highlighted in the recent publication “Meeting Scotland’s Retrofit Challenge: solutions from the industry”, which was co-ordinated by the Chartered Institute of Building and jointly published by 14 leading organisations from across the built environment sector.

Retrofit presents a complicated, multifaceted, cross-portfolio challenge for which there will be no silver-bullet solution. We must consider the problems and the potential future pitfalls if we are to achieve our net zero ambitions in tenements across Scotland and in order to develop such a legal framework sooner rather than later.

I agree with Ben Macpherson that we will find that the net zero legislation in the heat in buildings strategy does not fit with tenement law in Scotland and so it will not make early progress. A joined-up, holistic policy-making approach will be needed if Scotland is to reach its targets and ensure not only that our existing buildings are warm and energy efficient but that they promote the health and wellbeing of the people who live there and use them.

The solutions and key industry recommendations in “Meeting Scotland’s Retrofit Challenge” therefore act as a welcome focus on how the Government could identify opportunities and either remove or mitigate existing barriers.

At the heart of such an approach are the challenges identified in the Local Government and Housing Committee’s recent work on the Housing (Cladding Remediation) (Scotland) Bill. Many of the challenges on tenement issues, such as surveying buildings and gaining access to them, will be the same. The Government is already aware of those aspects, having taken that bill through as emergency legislation, so we might see discussion of exactly the same challenges in the context of tenements.

The Scottish Law Commission’s discussion paper on tenement law represents a welcome first step in establishing the necessary governance structures to address the maintenance of tenement buildings across Scotland, which operate within a complex multitenure system that we need to get to grips with sooner rather than later. As Graham Simpson stated, the development of compulsory owners associations could be one way of addressing that. We must look towards having a solution-driven approach where, regardless of who owns which flat in a tenement property, we see group effort and group funding of what are, let us face it, expensive works.

The Scottish Law Commission’s proposals would provide a legal framework for establishing the relevant powers and duties. Should they be adopted in legislation, along with suitable guidance and advice, owners associations, managers and individual property owners—individual owners will also want to be at the heart of such a solution—will have a suitable legal framework to enable us to move forward with retrofit in the future.

It is clear to those of us who represent communities with a large number of tenements that we will face many challenges—existing and future—especially in relation to the retrofit of tenement properties. However, as Ben Macpherson and Graham Simpson have outlined, Parliament, in a collective and cross-party way, needs to look now at what actions can be taken early in the next parliamentary session. For example, a commitment is needed from all parties to support a tenement maintenance bill in the next session of Parliament. We can build on the positive work that has been done and the solutions that have been developed—sometimes not by Government but by outside bodies. We must ensure that we get solutions in place for people who live in tenements, because they need those solutions.

I go back to the example of my constituent whom I met eight years ago. We need to ensure that those issues are addressed. They have not been addressed, and all of us in this chamber have an opportunity to help to fix that.

Significant research has been done by the University of Glasgow and Marie Curie on terminally ill people having to move. Statistics show that 27,600 people in Scotland had to move home as a result of experience with dying, death and bereavement. How is that dealt with in the bill? Marie Curie’s evidence to the committee suggested giving terminally ill people full exemption from eviction. Where is the Government with regard to drafting potential amendments on that?

I will try to be concise in looking at some personalisation issues.

You will have seen the evidence that was given by the Dogs Trust. I do not know what thoughts the minister might have had since we took that evidence, but we are looking at how we might flip things round so that it is for the landlord to say whether pets are allowed, rather than for the tenant to apply and go through a tribunal process.

The shift is almost towards a presumption in favour, but taking—

A significant part of the bill relates to home adaptations. Currently, the bill will require tenants to wait six months before they apply to make modifications to their home. Concerns have been raised about what that could mean for older citizens and people with disabilities. Will you clarify whether their needs will be considered when you are looking at that?

We have also heard concerns relating to other portfolios with regard to people getting home from hospital and whether the timescale can be sped up in such cases. Have those concerns been taken into account? Often, people are stuck in hospital, and the need to make modifications at home is one of the reasons that we have heard for delayed discharge.

Thank you, minister.

Good morning to you, minister, and your officials. I express my frustration, as Mark Griffin has, that we are not able to look at the detail. I have being arguing for some time that the mid-market rent sector, especially in the social rented sector, should be removed from the bill. I hope that it is. The mystery is not useful for us when we are doing our work. I hope that, when we meet, we can get clarification on that. I met a number of developers during the summer that have withdrawn from pretty large-scale developments in Edinburgh, which are desperately needed.

Some evidence has suggested that landlords are leaving, or are planning to leave, the private rented sector. From what I have heard, there seems to have been a change in tone from the minister since the change in Government structure. What has been done to derisk the bill for landlords to ensure that we have a balance and that we do not see a loss of more private rented sector properties, especially in the capital, where that has been happening?