Seòmar agus comataidhean

Data was also one of the key points mentioned when we spoke to CARM last week, and it is different in different parts of the country. One of the things that we talked about was how data on services that are available in Edinburgh and Glasgow might be different from that on services that are available in the Highlands, for example. When looking at the lived experience and the data that is available, is that taken into account to make sure that things are changing and that policy follows that?

Yes.

Cabinet secretary, will you expand on your responsibilities on that? One of the examples that was used this morning was the Government’s focus on, and success in, tackling child poverty. How does that determine the broader overview of the budget? Budget spending does not sit in one silo. It has to be a broader policy approach. From your point of view, where does the use of data come into that broader approach and how is that combined with lived experience?

Thank you, convener. For a number of years, I was a member of the commission on school reform with Reform Scotland, which is now known as Enlighten, and I was a member of Reform Scotland’s advisory board. I was also a member of East Lothian Council from 2007 to 2022 and sat on various education committees. That is my declaration.

I have no relevant interests to declare.

I cannot speak for the Government on tax policy. I mentioned that LBTT is under review.

Rachael Hamilton’s amendment 224 seeks to repeal the additional dwelling supplement entirely, which is at odds with the policy intent of supporting opportunities for first-time buyers and homeowners. It would also be likely to have a significantly negative revenue impact. Therefore, I ask Rachael Hamilton not to move amendment 224.

Rachael Hamilton’s amendment 225 seeks to exempt properties from the additional dwelling supplement in cases in which a buyer intends to renovate a property to make it habitable. We consider the amendment to be unnecessary on the basis that properties that are genuinely unsuitable for use as a dwelling are deemed non-residential and, as such, ADS does not apply to their purchase. If the intention is to exempt purchases of otherwise habitable properties, such properties will be correctly treated as dwellings for ADS purposes. In such cases, the current ADS repayment arrangements are considered sufficient. Therefore, I ask Rachael Hamilton not to move amendment 225.

I will finish my point on amendment 537 and then come back to amendment 536.

It is also unclear how such requirements could be effectively enforced with no formal agreement being in place between the prospective tenant and the landlord or agent. Setting additional requirements in this area might also inadvertently discourage mainstream landlords from letting to students rather than support better access. I therefore ask the member not to move that particular amendment.

As I mentioned, it is about the fact that no formal agreement is in place between the tenant and the landlord or agent, which might discourage that.

I will touch on number of points—I was going to come on to income, which is just one of the requirements. I am happy to engage further on that particular point with Ms Duncan-Glancy.

I am happy to further engage with Graham Simpson on the drafting and the point that he has made.

Ross Greer’s amendments 191, 192, 192A, 197 and 198 seek to devolve responsibility for the setting of council tax for unoccupied dwellings. I agree in principle with the proposal to remove caps imposed on the variation and modification of council tax for unoccupied dwellings. The Government is committed to delivering a fairer housing and taxation system. In line with that commitment, we worked closely with local government, through the joint working group on sources of local government funding and council tax reform, to deliver the first council tax premium on second homes from 1 April 2024.

Local authorities should have greater flexibility in relation to the council tax that applies to unoccupied dwellings in their areas. The pressures that are associated with second homes vary significantly across Scotland. In some areas, second homes reduce housing availability and, in others, they might contribute to local economies. Such decisions are best made by local authorities based on the needs of their local communities.

Amendment 191 would remove a cap on increasing council tax for unoccupied dwellings by means of regulations under section 33(1) of the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003. I agree with that and ask members to support the amendment.

Amendment 192, along with amendments 192A, 197 and 198, would remove caps on powers to vary or modify the application of council tax for unoccupied dwellings. Although I agree with that, I cannot support the amendments because they would also impose duties on the Scottish ministers to exercise powers in a particular way. However, I offer to work with Ross Greer ahead of stage 3, with a view to removing the cap on the power of local authorities to modify the application of council tax.

Ross Greer’s amendments 462 to 464 and 478 would commit the Government to a revaluation and modify valuation plans used for council tax purposes. There is broad agreement on the need for council tax reform, but views differ on how it should be reformed. The Scottish Government and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities have announced a joint programme of engagement to build consensus on long-term council tax reform. A revaluation exercise might look different depending on the form that that ultimately takes.

I am happy to engage with the member on that particular point. On the complex issues that are there, we need to work with Revenue Scotland.

No. We need to encourage them. We know that there have been issues with landlords and foreign students who have come here, and we have all had casework about it. It should be made as easy as possible for foreign students to come to and reside in Scotland. We also need to recognise where landlords sit in relation to the issue. Again, I am sympathetic to the point that we are looking at. We should be working to engage with the sector to progress that and to make the system as easy as possible. The sector is looking at the issue.

Amendment 540, in the name of Ross Greer, would enable students living in PBSA to bring their contract to an end with either seven or 28 days’ notice, depending on when the accommodation agreement started. A 28-day notice period would reflect the notice period in the mainstream PRS. The amendment reflects the temporary emergency legislation that was introduced in response to Covid.

Although I understand the purpose of the amendment, I cannot support it. The Scottish Government led a review of purpose-built student accommodation, working with a multi-agency group, the outcome of which contained 11 recommendations. Those covered issues such as regulations, supply and affordability in the PBSA sector. The recommendations are currently being progressed—I come back to the point that I made to Mr Greer earlier. Further consultation on notice periods has been undertaken by way of student and provider surveys; the results are currently being analysed.

In addition, a PBSA agreement is a very different type of agreement. Voids in PBSA can only be filled by students, which is difficult to do in the middle of the academic year. Amendment 540 would have a substantial impact on the current operation of PBSA, with the possibility of higher rental costs for students and an increase in affordability issues.