Chamber and committees

I thank the Labour Party for bringing this debate to the chamber.

“The Scottish Government’s strategies for housing and homelessness are failing and any attempt to say otherwise is starting to feel like an attempt to gaslight the Scottish public.”

Those are not my words but those of Shelter Scotland’s director.

Last week, the First Minister stated that he wanted to be honest about where the Scottish Government has been going wrong. I welcome the acceptance that ministers are failing to deliver on housing in Scotland and that Scotland is in a housing emergency.

Sadly, however—we have seen this today—the Scottish Government does not seem to be acting with humility or accepting the policy failures on its watch. Instead, we have more deflection and the usual from the SNP’s playbook—that is, blaming everyone else and not taking responsibility.

Where does the member think that the Scottish Government has gone wrong?

Housing policy in Scotland has been devolved for 25 years, and 17 of those years have been under this SNP Government. The Government’s motion desperately tries to suggest that a housing emergency is due to

“factors ... outwith the Scottish Government’s powers”.

However, there is no mention of the SNP-Green Government’s annual cuts to affordable housing budgets; no mention of the Scottish Government’s failing national planning framework, which is leading to land supply disappearing; no mention of the cuts to local government budgets; no mention that the City of Edinburgh Council, which now has some of the highest homeless rates in the country, has lost out on around £9.3 million in homelessness prevention funding under this Government; no mention of the rent controls policy, which, as ministers were warned, has led to rents soaring and landlords withdrawing properties from the market, housing associations scaling back their property investment portfolios and the complete loss of mid-market rent; and no mention of the fact that, under this SNP Government, 40,000 disabled people are on waiting lists for housing associations and council homes. That is the SNP and the Green Party’s record in office, and it is time that they accepted it. They have failed Scotland and they need to take responsibility.

Shelter Scotland has stated:

“It is a national scandal.”

I agree. Scotland is in the grip of a devastating housing emergency that damages lives every single day. Across the country, local authority homelessness services face systemic failure. Five councils have declared housing emergencies, and local authorities are routinely failing to even uphold legal housing rights. There is a failure to deliver the social homes that we urgently need, and there has been a significant slowdown in new social housing developments over the past year. The housing emergency is damaging people’s health, wellbeing and education, as well as our economy, and it leaves thousands of our fellow Scots without anywhere to call home.

Scottish Conservatives have repeatedly called for the Scottish Government to declare a national housing emergency, but those calls have fallen on deaf ears until now, so SNP ministers need to play catch-up. As Crisis says in its briefing, declaring a national housing emergency will be of benefit to Scotland only if success is clearly defined and if action targeted at the root causes is taken swiftly by the Scottish Government.

SNP ministers have had to be dragged kicking and screaming into accepting the reality that we face a housing emergency in Scotland. Ministers must now acknowledge where their policies have failed and reach out to charities and across the political divide for new ideas and fresh thinking. Ministers must act. They must urgently outline to the Parliament what will change across all Government portfolios and what fresh leadership will be brought to tackle the housing emergency, like what happened when the Government declared a public health emergency as a result of the drug deaths crisis. Scottish ministers also need to produce an urgent housing emergency plan. That is why, after this debate, I hope that there will be cross-party talks and that the Scottish Government will make an urgent statement on the national housing emergency in the coming weeks.

I move amendment S6M-13197.2, to insert at end:

“; notes that there are a record number of people in Scotland experiencing homelessness with almost 10,000 children stuck in temporary accommodation and 45 children becoming homeless in Scotland every day calls on the Scottish Ministers to bring forward an urgent housing emergency action plan to tackle the issues raised by the Scottish Government’s own expert Homelessness Prevention Task and Finish Group, including actions that will reduce the number of children stuck in temporary accommodation by the end of this parliamentary session; recognises the need to improve capacity in local government to prevent more local homelessness services falling into systemic failure, and the need to improve delivery for those with specific supported living needs, and calls on the Scottish Ministers to review how national government, local authorities and third sector partners are working together on the shared ambition to end homelessness.”

Will the member take an intervention?

Good morning to the panel. I want to ask about NPF4 policies that encourage developers to build on brownfield sites and what else can be done to help support that. Specifically, we have heard concerns around decontamination costs. What impact has NPF4 made and is there is anything that you want to put on the record on that?

Good morning, panel, and thanks for joining us here and online today. I want to ask a question about concerns that the committee has heard about the wording of some NPF4 policies, which people have stated are unclear. Do you have any examples of where you would like to see that improved? If not, we can move on to another question.

I hope that NPF4 has not driven Ian Aikman to an early retirement, but we will leave that to one side.

David Givan touched on how NPF4 can move towards delivery of an infrastructure-first approach. Gordon MacDonald and I represent Edinburgh and the Lothians, and we have seen huge amounts of development take place with new-build homes, but not necessarily with corresponding infrastructure. Are there examples of how NPF4 might help to move towards that and whether you have seen that change?

We are short on time, so I will ask my last question, which is potentially more for the island and rural councils. There is conflicting evidence on the balance to be struck between NPF4 protecting areas with carbon-rich soils and the development of renewable energy infrastructure. What are your views on whether or not those things are in competition? We heard in evidence that the climate and nature emergencies sometimes rub up against planning in NPF4. Do you have any views on that?

If no one wants to add to that, I will move on to the delivery of the infrastructure-first approach that is part of NPF4, and specifically whether or not there have been any changes around that. Here in Edinburgh, the west Edinburgh green network has specifically looked to embed walking and cycling connections for the developments that will grow to the west of the city.

Also—I will maybe bring Morag in—there is the grid upgrade and renewables projects that are coming forward. Housing may be one of the biggest workforce problems. What work is going on that is not necessarily outlined in NPF4, but the industry is taking forward?

I thank the Parliament’s clerks for their assistance with amendments to stage 3. I also pay tribute to and thank the Minister for Housing for the constructive way in which he has approached cross-party work on the bill. It has been very important for us to take that forward.

Last Monday, I met a group of residents who live in an orphan development in the capital to discuss the cladding bill and what they hope is the start of the end of what they have called a living hell. The stress that residents have faced and the information vacuum that they have had to live with has been unacceptable, especially when we consider that they are our constituents and are living in properties that have been labelled as potentially containing cladding that poses a threat to life. They were absolutely clear that they want a solution as soon as possible, because too many people’s lives have been put on hold as they wait to find out whether the cladding on their buildings is safe and what works need to be undertaken to allow them to move on with their lives. One resident said, “This whole situation has been really upsetting for many of us—this total lack of actual work—and we remain stuck in our properties, deemed fire risks, and unable to sell.”

I sincerely hope that the passing of the bill today will be the start of a solutions-based approach by the Government to deliver the outcomes that are needed to let people move on with their lives. This cannot just be a process; it must be about delivering the outcomes. The Scottish Government must implement the bill at speed and commission the surveying of buildings and the managed delivery of solutions at pace.

I would also like to make an appeal for the orphan buildings that were part of the initial pilot to be given an early focus. We know that they were in the pilot schemes, but I hope that ministers will acknowledge that those people have been let down and that the potential solution that has already been outlined to many residents must focus on the Government’s commissioning of surveys and works for those buildings. I have said to my constituents that I would write to the minister to see whether he would meet them to discuss how that can be done, not just for their development but for the other pilot projects.

As I stated at stages 1 and 2, I am determined to improve the rights of residents, including their right to be kept informed of not only the surveying work that is taking place, but any remediation work that will take place and how that will impact on their homes.

I hope that the amendments in my name that are now included in the bill will give residents the reporting mechanisms that will inform them of what is happening and when remediation work will take place. Good lines of communication are critically important, and I hope that the poor experiences that residents have had will now change.

As the minister stated in his letter to MSPs, the collaborative approach regarding the bill will extend beyond its parliamentary passage. I really welcome that. It is hugely important that the minister returns to Parliament with further updates on the programme and the progress that is being made. I hope that Parliament and the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee will take an active role in ensuring that that work is progressed.

The bill has created a framework for progress, but it is critically important that we now see that all the outcomes are delivered. As the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee stated, progress by the Scottish Government some seven years on has been “concerningly slow”. That is in sharp contrast with England, where more than two fifths of buildings have had work either started or completed, with 1,608 buildings in the scope of that programme in comparison with 105 in Scotland. That is why it is understandable that industry witnesses who gave evidence to committee expressed significant frustration at the slow progress in Scotland and the lack of leadership to date. I hope that the minister is about to change that.

Although the bill is often technical in nature, as with all framework bills, the devil is in the detail. I hope that both the guidance and ministerial direction will be properly scrutinised, especially to look at the impacts not only on our constituents but on small and medium-sized enterprises.

During the stage 1 debate, it was clear from the evidence, and from the discussions that the committee had, that many buildings will need on-going management and, often, bespoke factoring solutions. A number of points on that were outlined during the debate earlier. I hope that we will now see details of how that aspect will be taken forward. Although many of those issues are outside the scope of the bill, they are important, and I hope that ministers will look to update Parliament on how they will be taken forward.

Members, including my colleague Graham Simpson, have mentioned electric cars. That issue was raised with the committee on many occasions, and we need to take seriously concerns over the management of electric cars and bikes.

In a letter that the minister sent to me, dated 7 May, he stated that the Government’s approach to purpose-built accommodation for students in the HMO sector, as well as to care homes, hotels and hospitals, was not in the scope of the bill, but he was content with the safeguards in place for those buildings. I hope that the housing minister will agree to update Parliament in the future on those buildings, including the potential for publishing data around any remediation work that is already taking place and how the guidance might be developed to include those sectors.

The amendments that have been accepted today—for example, the amendment in Pam Duncan-Glancy’s name—can provide an opportunity for better safeguarding for disabled people in those developments and others. That has presented Parliament with an opportunity to look at how we evacuate all buildings in Scotland, especially when it comes to vulnerable people in hospitals and care homes and disabled people in all properties. I am sure that colleagues, and the committee, will want to revisit that.

Scottish Conservatives will support the bill at decision time tonight, but we do so with reservations about the Government’s limited progress to date. That has to change, but the reporting duties in the bill and the role that Parliament now has to challenge ministers on the delivery of outcomes have improved.

Above all, I hope that the Scottish Government will now give leadership and priority to the expanded team in the Scottish Government who will take forward this work. It is critically important that we deliver. We have two years left of the current session of Parliament; I certainly hope that, by the end of that time, all our constituents who are living in those 105 homes will have had the surveys take place and will know that work will be paid for and taken forward to make their homes safe, and that, above all, we can ensure that Scotland never sees a Grenfell-type tragedy.