That is probably enough from me, convener. Unless anyone else has anything to say, I am content.

You have touched on auditing and the assurance requirements. What are your views on how the Scottish Government has managed that work and on the plans that it has updated? Do you think that it is being realistic, or is it trying to be a bit too ambitious? Will the timescales that it has set out be met?

Do you have a similar view, Bryan?

John, do you think that the Scottish Government has got some of that right?

I am happy to close on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives.

The bill has had a long and difficult journey to where we now find ourselves. It was 10 months ago that we started stage 1; stage 2 covered numerous weeks of meetings of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee; and stage 3 has taken up almost three full days of parliamentary business.

However, the legislation, despite all the time that we have spent on it, still does not represent the response to Scotland’s housing crisis that we so badly need. Despite all that time, we will not see one single home built as a result of the bill, and it also risks fracturing the lives of hundreds of thousands of privately rented households in Scotland.

Many stakeholders, including organisations such as Scottish Land & Estates and the Scottish Association of Landlords, have continued to warn that the rent control proposals in the bill will hurt supply in the private rented sector. Members on the Conservative benches have raised concerns about those proposals since the start of the process, and we have spoken about examples in countries such as Sweden and Germany, where rent controls did not lead to proper investment in housing. The SNP’s failed experiment with rent caps in 2022 has not stopped the Government trying to make those damaging measures permanent. As I said, stage 3 has been a long time coming, and yet the bill will not contribute anything.

In the debate, Meghan Gallacher said that improving the supply of houses should be a driving factor. That is not happening, but the bill will put in place permanent rent controls, which is misguided, as it will ensure that investment does not take place. Rent controls do not make homes. The bill will see fewer houses built and homelessness continue to grow. It is a missed opportunity. Councils will struggle to cope, and the bill will not do anything to help the housing emergency.

Willie Rennie spoke about stamina. We have had a huge amount of stamina in going through stage 2 and stage 3, but the outcome is disappointing. What we have achieved is a long way from building confidence in the sector. It is not what the sector needs—the balance is not there, and planning is still a barrier. What we needed was confidence, stability and security, and we have none of that.

Edward Mountain spoke about the way in which landlords have been demonised in the bill process, and the language that has been used. The needs of both residents and tenants and landlords need to be looked at in the long term to ensure that things will get better. In reality, the bill will not make things better—it will mean that there are still inequalities. Edward Mountain highlighted the finding that 33 per cent of landlords no longer want to continue in the business, and that is not the balance that we want to see.

In the debate, we have heard a narrative that pitches tenants against landlords. As I have said, that is not the narrative that we need to hear, but it is the inference from the proposals in the bill. Despite the Bute house agreement ending more than a year ago, the SNP appears to have fallen hook, line and sinker for the narrative that rent controls need to be in place.

It is time to talk about that narrative. We need to talk much more about the solutions that are needed. We need an attempt to increase the housing supply, and we have tried to move that forward. The bill was an opportunity to realise that and to deal with the housing emergency, but it has catastrophically failed to achieve what was set out. The bill is a missed opportunity, and it will risk making the housing crisis even worse—[Interruption.] For those reasons, Scottish Conservatives will certainly not support the bill at decision time—[Interruption.]

You touched on underlying issues. The Scottish Government’s policy aimed at improving health in the population, which is very much one of your priorities, goes hand in hand with what you are trying to do with social security. The support mechanism that you are trying to put together will help a number of people through the disability benefit process. What knock-on effects are the policies that the Government is pursuing to improve health and to address health inequalities having in terms of driving the increase in the benefits that are being claimed?

We already know that there is an increase in the number of individuals who are receiving disability benefits. It would be good to get a clear understanding of what the Scottish Government is doing, what drivers are behind the increased number of people receiving disability benefits, and how the Scottish Government’s work is helping to inform policy.

You touched on the fact that there has been an increase in mental health inequalities. Those are obviously having a detrimental effect; some people are not getting back into work because of disability and they have now found themselves under the mental health processes. Are you looking at any measures specifically to tackle that, to ensure that people have the support mechanisms to get them through the process and back into employment?

The member makes a valid point. If we are to create that kind of environment, we must ensure that other yards can fulfil orders and provide capacity within the system.

As I said, that investment will support thousands of jobs and will lead to more opportunities. It will cost about £250 million to build a frigate—which is about the same as what it costs the SNP to build a car ferry.

Such investment does not just happen by itself or by chance. There is a real opportunity here to work with the UK Government. In the past, the Conservative UK Government was very much involved, through its national shipbuilding strategy. I pay tribute to what it did. That strategy, with its focus on creating new technology and new jobs, needs to continue. I hope that the current Labour UK Government will continue to support Babcock and other firms to ensure that that remains the case.

The SNP Government needs to take a more positive approach when it comes to the realities of the defence sector. As we know, it takes an ideological stance, and that can make waves within the sector. We do not want to see that, and we need to ensure that the Scottish Government is adopting a more positive approach.

The investments that have been made are putting Scotland firmly at the centre of the global defence industry, securing thousands of jobs for the future. We have arrived at this point through proactive, bold and ambitious investment by Governments that recognise the importance of the industry. The onus is now on both the Scottish and UK Governments to show the same recognition into the future. If that happens, this success will continue.

I am pleased to be able to contribute to this afternoon’s debate, and I thank Paul Sweeney for bringing it to the chamber.

It goes without saying that the £10 billion deal to supply five type 26 frigates from Norway should be welcomed whole-heartedly. The debate is an excellent opportunity to do so, and everyone who has spoken has welcomed it. However, it is also an opportunity to look at the success of the UK’s defence industry in Scotland.

The industry has gone from strength to strength, and that needs to be celebrated. The new deal will support around 2,000 jobs at BAE Systems shipyards in Glasgow, as well as around 2,000 jobs across the maritime supply chain. More than 100 businesses will benefit directly from the agreement, nearly half of which are small or medium-sized businesses. That is a real boost to the economy and a shot in the arm.

The new deal for the Clyde is a landmark moment for the Scottish shipbuilding industry. It is also a call to action for the Scottish and UK Governments. We now need to see them working hand in glove with industry in Scotland to ensure that that fantastic sector can capitalise on the opportunities that lie ahead. That includes supporting opportunities not only on the Clyde.

Babcock in Rosyth, which is in my region of Mid Scotland and Fife, is in the running to win a £1 billion deal to build ships for Denmark. It should be supported, too. The chief executive, David Lockwood, said that he is “confident but not complacent” about the bid. It would follow on from the previous deal to build five new type 31 warships for the Royal Navy, which was worth £1.25 billion.

Part of the investment in the Rosyth yard includes building a new assembly hall, which will allow two frigates to be parallel assembled. That is another huge investment. Such investments in state-of-the-art infrastructure will support organisations and structures in Rosyth and on the Clyde.