Chamber and committees

Has any modelling been done on the impact of the targets for replacing polluting systems on tenants’ rent, and the balance between Government intervention and support, and the investment being made by individuals through rent?

I also want to talk about the innovative measures to fund the capital projects that you spoke about. You highlighted the example of the Government working with Edinburgh council to unlock investment in Granton. What specifically is the Government’s role in the investment in Granton? What funding streams are being considered, and could other local authorities use similar funding models, particularly in rural areas, where some local authorities struggle because of their size, as you highlighted earlier?

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the net zero secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding whether unused funds from energy efficiency area-based grant schemes could be reallocated, including to reduce fuel poverty in the coming financial year. (S6O-04216)

Area-based schemes are place-based approaches that can transform whole neighbourhoods by improving health, creating jobs and cutting greenhouse gas emissions, but, over the past three years, more than £60 million of a possible £192 million has gone unspent. That is because, as the minister highlighted, councils often do not receive their grant allocation until well into the financial year. Will the Scottish Government commit to making sure that the funding is made available to councils in time for the funds to be spent on vital services throughout the year?

I put it on the record that I have no relevant interests to declare, but I should note that I am a member of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee and that I will be scrutinising crossover elements of the cabinet secretary’s portfolio next week.

I also apologise to the convener and the cabinet secretary for arriving late; family life is sometimes not as adaptable to a late substitution request as we might like it to be.

The areas that I want to touch on relate to homelessness. The Scottish Housing Regulator has reported that some council homelessness services are at risk of systemic failure, which has impacted on their delivery. It said:

“for some councils the demands in the homelessness system—the number of people who are homeless, and the level of need they have—exceed the capacity in the system to respond, particularly the availability of suitable temporary and permanent accommodation. The increase in capacity that is needed goes beyond that which the impacted councils can deliver alone.”

Given that the regulator’s view is that councils cannot solve the problem on their own, is the cabinet secretary satisfied that the budget allocation to local councils will be sufficient to address the heightened risk of systemic failure in homelessness services? Do you think that the regulator will come to the view that the funding has removed its concern about systemic failure in homelessness services?

I know that you cannot pre-empt or pre-judge what a regulator might say, but is the Government’s aim or ambition that those councils will no longer be at risk of systemic failure?

Your answer leads me to my next question, which is about the balance of the funding for the affordable housing supply programme. It is good that that budget has increased on last year, although, in real terms, it is not quite at the level that it was two years ago. How is that budget allocated and balanced, given the stark and desperate need for suitable temporary accommodation, particularly in the city of Edinburgh? How will the long-term ambitions of the affordable housing supply programme be balanced against meeting the real and harsh needs of those who are living in unsuitable temporary accommodation right now?

I have a final question. Unfortunately, homelessness has been on an upward trend for some years. Do you think that, as a result of the spending decisions in the budget, we might finally see it come down in next year’s figures?

That seems to be a change in direction from the Government because, in its letter, the existing service provider was informed that the contract would not be retendered. I am sure that deaf people in the public gallery and across the country will welcome the news that the service is to be retendered, which is different from the information that I have received so far. If that is a change in the Government’s position, it is welcome.

We should put ourselves in the shoes of a deaf person and imagine that we are not feeling well so we go to our general practitioner and are referred for further tests. When we go to the consultant’s appointment, we cannot get an interpreter. Previously, before we had the service in place, people would often have to take family members with them. Can members imagine taking a teenage family member to interpret the devastating news that they could potentially receive? The change in information from the Government is welcome, but I ask the First Minister to ensure that the deaf and deafblind community is fully consulted on what the new service will look like.

To ask the First Minister what consideration the Scottish Government has given to what the potential impact might be on deaf and deafblind people of the termination of its contract with Contact Scotland BSL. (S6F-03665)