Seòmar agus comataidhean

As I am sure that the minister will know from his constituency mailbag, there are people who want to buy properties that are in a state of disrepair but who are discouraged from doing so because they are concerned that they would be liable for ADS. Amendment 225 would provide an exemption for up to 12 months from the time of purchase to allow an individual to bring such a property back into a habitable state. Obviously, that would allow us to have more housing stock at a time of a housing crisis.

I wanted to intervene on you when you were discussing amendment 203, but my intervention is relevant to what you have just talked about.

Obviously, some rental properties are managed by property organisations that must deal with different local authorities across Scotland. How can tenants and landlords understand when the designation of a rent control area will take place if local authorities are not consistent in their approach? Surely that does not lend itself to good business practice and to the consistency and clarity that those property organisations need. That consistency and clarity would grow the economy, protect jobs and ensure that those organisations do not come out of the market because of all the confusion.

May I intervene again? I just need to be clear on this. Are you saying that the Government will encourage local authorities to submit reports at a fairly similar time? What is it that you are encouraging, and is it just encouragement—that is, that you will say something rather than putting that into legislation?

Amendment 224 would modify the Land and Buildings Transaction Tax (Scotland) Act 2013 to repeal schedule 2A, which makes provision for the ADS, and section 26A, which introduces that schedule. Other changes to the act would remove references to schedule 2A. We all know what ADS is, but I want to set out that we should not be doing things that cause more harm than good.

In the recent budget, the Scottish National Party made the decision to increase ADS from 6 per cent to 8 per cent. I will quote the Institute for Fiscal Studies, which published “Assessing Scottish tax strategy and policy”. It noted that

“Taxing property transactions is an exceptionally damaging way to raise revenue.”

It went on to state that

“The increase in the ADS makes a bad tax bigger and even more harmful.”

It also highlighted that the increase in ADS will make it

“more difficult and expensive for those who remain in the rental sector – tenants (who are likely to face higher rents as a result of the policy) as well as landlords.”

It is highly damaging. It is a vindictive tax on the housing sector. It unfairly targets landlords and second-home owners without any consideration of the wider implications of the tax or any meaningful solution to address the root cause of our housing crisis. Amendment 224 aims to restore a functional housing market in which the private sector can work with the Government to tackle housing shortages.

I want to speak to Ross Greer’s amendments in the group. He kindly took an intervention from me and addressed my question. However, this bill is not the place for those amendments. He did not address how the amendments can achieve his aims. The point that I tried to make was that if those amendments were adopted—to remove the NDR and put an additional surcharge on council tax rates—it would be impossible to access schemes such as the small business bonus scheme. The amendments would mandate higher rates specifically for the self-catering and short-term lets sector, which is a really important sector.

Yes, of course.

Self-catering properties are about 0.8 per cent of Scotland’s total housing stock—that is compared with 3.4 per cent that are empty homes and 0.9 per cent that are second homes. We are talking about small landlords here, not large investors. Although your aim is laudable, it does not deal with the root cause of the housing shortage. It only pushes small landlords into a detrimental financial situation; it does not deal with cause of the situation.

I agree with Meghan Gallacher. For example, the self-catering business is important in my area in South Scotland: it is a crucial part of the bed stock and drives the local rural economy. Having spoken to many people across Scotland, I know that they have had a difficult few years with the short-term let licensing and other legislation that has come down the road. I fear that this will be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.

If I were a member of this committee, I would not support Ross Greer’s amendments because, even though he has tried to explain them, I do not believe that they would achieve what he is aiming to do.

In the rural areas that we represent, short-term lets are important to the local economy. I wonder whether the removal of the NDR relief and exemptions, and the additional surcharge, would mean that those businesses, which are very small businesses, would be unable to apply for the small business bonus scheme, which would be quite detrimental to that economy.

For transparency on my amendments in this group, I point out that I worked with Propertymark, which is a leading membership organisation that works with hundreds of property agents.

Amendments 203 to 205 seek to make changes that would require local authorities to submit their reports on rent conditions to Scottish ministers on a specified date. As drafted, the bill requires all local authorities to assess rent conditions in their area and to submit a report to ministers at least every five years. The first report must be completed by 30 November 2026. However, that risks creating a scenario in which all 32 local authorities will work to their own timelines and report at different times.

To help tenants and landlords to understand when the designation of a rent control area will take place, local authorities should be required to submit their reports on the same date. That would ensure that the periodic assessment of rent conditions by local authorities was consistent.

Amendments 203 to 205 would improve transparency, ensure consistency across local authorities and make it easier for the Scottish Government to assess national trends and take informed action, where it was needed. Amendment 204 is consequential to amendment 203, as is amendment 205.

Amendment 206 aims to bring greater clarity and consistency on the designation of rent control areas for landlords and local authorities. As the bill is drafted, the designation of a rent control area is open ended, which means that the provision can be interpreted and applied by local authorities differently across Scotland. To help tenants and landlords to understand rent control areas, amendment 206 would require local authorities to specify the rent control area by reference to the street or ward. That would ensure that such areas were clearly defined and easily understood and that implementation was more consistent.

I will now speak to some of the other amendments on rent control areas. Meghan Gallacher’s amendment 133 would ensure a layer of protection for rural areas in which a rent control area was introduced. Amendment 90 is similar, in that it would strengthen the bill by ensuring that the impact on rural areas was considered.

Amendments 81 to 84 would change the reporting period for local authorities to assess rent conditions from the five-year period that is specified in the bill to four years, three years, two years or one year respectively.

Amendments 94 to 97 deal with the power to designate a rent control area. They would amend the period after which regulations to designate a rent control area will expire from five years to four years, three years, two years or one year respectively.

I move amendment 203.

I will press amendment 203. I am slightly disappointed that the minister is not minded to support most of the amendments. However, he has committed to supporting Edward Mountain’s amendment 142, which will change the wording slightly to create some clarity. I also understand the comments that the minister made about ensuring that local authorities have flexibility. That is really important, because we accept that local authorities want to be flexible, and we are supportive of encouraging that autonomy.

I understand Maggie Chapman’s concern that limiting the lifetime of RCAs could be overburdensome on local authorities, and I thank her for her support for amendment 206.

It is important that we recognise that consistency in local authority approach is essential to driving the local economy, particularly in rural areas, which need to be supported, as Meghan Gallacher eloquently set out. Improving data collection and giving the rental sector confidence, which has been lacking lately, are really important, because we know that some of the legislation has had an impact and affected the sector. It is reasonable to ask for clarity and consistency, and that is very important when it comes to rent control assessments, rents and designation.