Chamber and committees

Do we have a rough idea of the numbers of students who are having that difficulty? You spoke about foreign students, but you also indicated that some UK students might have a similar issue. Do you have any statistics on the size or depth of the problem?

We have discussed the difficulties with security that aid agencies and staff on the ground have to face. How do we make progress on that? You have said that international organisations require to have pressure put on them but, for the people on the ground who are living with and dealing with the situation daily, what hope and what support can you give them in relation to how they can manage the situation?

I thank the witnesses for their frank and full updates so far. Many of our questions have already been answered. What I am hearing from you and from others is that the horrific and harrowing situation is now at a tipping point. The UN humanitarian office has said that partners are warning that, without immediate fuel deliveries, a full shutdown of water and sanitation will possibly happen by the end of this week. That takes us to a different level.

You have talked about the number of trucks that have been going in. I believe that about 80 trucks went in on Monday and Tuesday of this week. You have touched on the potential for malnutrition as a result of that reduced supply of food and the difficulties with medication, and there is now the potential issue with the supply of water and sanitation. Where do you see the situation going, given the stark warning that we have had from the UN about what could happen this week?

Maybe Saleh Saeed wants to answer that.

Amendment 218 is consequential to amendment 219. Amendment 219 introduces flexibility to adjust rent mid-tenancy in response to significant changes in circumstances. That is particularly relevant in cases in which an employee leaves their job but remains within the property as the tenant or when a successor takes over the tenancy after a death, moving to a market rent from a nominal rent that is linked to employment.

When rent needs to be raised because of circumstances that are considered by ministers to be an emergency, amendment 219 would enable that to be done in an incremental manner, removing the limit on the number of times that rent can be increased.

Amendment 220 is consequential to amendment 214, which was debated previously. It amends proposed new section 43J of the Private Housing (Tenancies) (Scotland) Act 2016 to the same effect, but for tenancies that are situated in a rent control area.

In relation to amendments 138, 161, 162, 201, 202, 294 and 495, rent increase appeal processes must be fair, proportionate, time limited and bound to ensure timely resolutions that provide certainty for landlords and tenants. An open-ended system with no cost to tenants might inadvertently encourage speculative appeals, and that would put strain on adjudication bodies.

On amendments 139 and 140, rent setting is inherently subjective and it reflects the market and what tenants are willing to pay. Therefore, rent officers or tribunals should not be allowed to vary rent determination.

On amendments 496 and 499, the repairing standard clearly establishes that, under the enforcement baseline for property conditions, it is a criminal offence to let a property that fails to meet the standards. The amendments are not only unnecessary but would introduce subjectivity to a well-defined framework.

On amendments 238 and 240, the existing costs of dealing with appeals are already seen as a deterrent against misuse by landlords. Penalties will only have a negative impact on the supply of small landlords by discouraging them from the sector.

I move amendment 218.

Amendment 226 would introduce a full rural impact assessment of the provisions of the bill on rural and island communities.

It is too late to put a pre-legislative impact assessment into the bill, although it would have been welcome, given the Scottish Government’s track record. Rural and island communities face fundamentally different housing challenges, and a one-size-fits-all approach simply does not work. In those areas, housing delivery is already constrained by limited infrastructure, higher build costs and a lack of available land.

Policies that are designed for urban centres, however well intentioned, have a limited impact in rural settings, and they can stall development and make homes less viable to rent out or build.

As highlighted by Scottish Land & Estates:

“Applying a rural impact assessment to this Bill could ensure that it enhances the rural rented sector rather than inadvertently causing harm.”

Without a clear understanding of how the bill will affect rural and island areas, we risk deepening the urban-rural divide in housing access, affordability and opportunity.

Scottish Land & Estates has also rightly noted:

“It is particularly difficult to appreciate the full impact the Housing Bill may, or may not have, on rural and island areas of Scotland due to the lack of detail within. The private rented sector, homelessness and fuel poverty all exhibit different characteristics across the regions of Scotland and for the impact of the Housing Bill to be fully understood ... it is essential for legislation to be fully considered in a Rural Impact Assessment”.

A rural and island impact assessment would ensure that the bill supports, rather than hinders, housing delivery in those communities. It would also give policy makers the evidence that they need to tailor solutions that work, not just in cities but across Scotland.

It is not about special treatment; it is about fair treatment, and it is essential if we want a housing system that truly serves all of Scotland.

I have listened to the cabinet secretary’s comments, and I am sure that Rachael Hamilton will reflect on them, but I would still like to press amendment 218.

You are calling for the budget to be ring fenced in order to support and save drama production. How likely do you think that is from the communications that you have had with the BBC? We have had the BBC here and, as you have said, there is a lot of smoke and mirrors when it indicates what it is trying to achieve or what its proposals are. When you scrape below the surface, things are not quite as rosy or as pleasant as it is trying to portray. If you were to have that funding in some capacity, do you believe that that would give you opportunities to develop and progress?

Good morning. Thank you for your briefing note, and for your frankness and honesty so far in this session. You have already identified the crux of the matter: culture in Scotland is being eroded, or it appears to be being eroded, and this situation is another step in that process.

The broader picture is ensuring that BBC Scotland recognises that it has a public broadcasting duty to fulfil, as you have explained already. I think that most of us around the table get that and understand where you are coming from, but the issue is how to take that message further. You have identified the potential loss of opportunities for young people, including training and apprenticeships, in all parts of the process. The issue is how we ensure that we keep those opportunities—I think that that is where we are all coming from. That might be by showing how detrimental the loss of that would be to the sector.

My initial question is, how should we galvanise as a Parliament to provide support? We can bring people here, ask questions and probe—we can do all that—but, at the end of the day, if there is a campaign or a process to be carried out, where do we take that? How do we manage that to ensure that we achieve success? If we lose “River City”, what is next to be lost and what will be lost after that?

You have touched on the vitally important issue of consistency of data, but you have also highlighted some of the practicalities that some of the amendments that you are discussing would give rise to, and the issue of whether local authorities would be able to cope with some of the extra work that would be required to manage the process. I am encouraged by your comments, because I think that the extra burden that would be put on local authorities might mean that the information that was received would not be as consistent as one would expect.

You indicated in response to Mr Kerr’s question that the zones will be set up. We understand the situation around that. Is it Glasgow City Council that will have the power of enforcement and the obligation to ensure that it is acted on? You touched on what will happen to existing traders and any exemptions that they will be entitled to. How will those exemptions be managed and policed to ensure compliance?