Chamber and committees

What can you or the Government do to ensure that registered social landlords have clarity about the new requirements for social housing that would give them the ability to plan for the investment required? That question is against the backdrop of the regulator’s concerns about a lack of financial planning and decarbonisation.

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?

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?

It would be broadly helpful for the committee to get information on authorities that you have described as being in systemic failure, but I will leave it to the convener to pursue that.

In previous weeks, we have heard evidence suggesting that the self-assurance approach to regulation could be subjected to more scrutiny. For example, Tenants Together Scotland members said that they would like to see the housing regulator

“carry out more regular checks on landlords categorised as low-risk to verify the accuracy of reported performance data.”

I have two questions on that. First, how can you give us assurance that social landlords’ performance information is checked for accuracy?

Secondly, with largely desktop-based regulation, is there a risk that it is potentially more difficult to pick up on culture issues in organisations?

I want to touch on an answer to a previous question. Some evidence from tenants’ groups has suggested that they would like the regulator to take a stronger approach when a social landlord’s performance is poor. For example, Robyn Kane from the City of Edinburgh Council area told us that the regulator identifies when performance is poor, and said:

“However, we do not see the benefit of that at all. It has taken more than six years to get some benefit.”—[Official Report, Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee, 3 December 2024; c 35.]

How can tenants see performance improving at a quicker pace following an intervention from the regulator?