Seòmar agus comataidhean

It is not yet operational. I know that the committee has raised the issue previously, and it was raised during the passage of the bill. I am glad to announce that it will be operational on 6 January. That is an important step forward. We will communicate with the committee on that around 6 January.

Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the legislative consent memorandum to the United Kingdom Government’s Renters’ Rights Bill.

The relevant provisions in the bill will prohibit discrimination and restrictions against people with children or people in receipt of benefits. That aligns with the Scottish Government’s work on rented sector reform and will provide an important element of protection to those vulnerable groups in the private rented sector.

As the committee will recall, the provisions on rental discrimination were first introduced by the previous Conservative Government in the Renters’ Reform Bill, which did not pass prior to the UK Parliament being prorogued, following the calling of a general election. Consideration of the associated LCM in the Scottish Parliament was also halted, given that the bill had fallen.

I am pleased that the new UK Government has elected to include rental discrimination provisions in the Renters’ Rights Bill and that those provisions appear to have support from a wide range of political parties and stakeholders.

Although housing is a devolved matter, there are elements in the provisions that fall into the reserved area of financial services. In order to ensure that the full range of protections are able to come into effect in Scotland, the Scottish Government is seeking the Parliament’s consent to the UK Government’s legislating on the devolved area of housing, as set out in the LCM. By proceeding in that manner, we will ensure that the full extent of the provisions will come into effect in Scotland in the same way as they will come into effect in England and Wales.

I and my officials look forward to answering any questions that members may have on the LCM. Thank you.

I am sure that, when I was on the committee before I became a minister, I asked the same question. It is very relevant. When we were doing the previous assessments, that is something that we have not had an issue with. From working with colleagues across the UK on Grenfell, I know that that is a very relevant issue in that regard, as well as cladding. However, at the moment, all the Governments are quite confident that the skills are there. The sector is beginning to skill up, realising the work that is required. We have had numerous intergovernmental meetings, and officials have had numerous meetings on that particular point. I have a meeting coming up with my UK Government colleague, and we will be asking the same thing. However, we have been reassured that there is a sufficient skills base at the moment. The sector recognises the need for that skills base, and is taking on more people.

At the moment, we are confident about what we have in Scotland and across the rest of the UK, but we are aware of the increased demand following the Grenfell inquiry and the cladding work both here and across Britain. We will continue to keep an eye on the issue, as it is incredibly important. We do not want any delays as a result of a lack of the availability of skills. However, at the moment, I am confident about the position.

Stephen Lea-Ross might want to add to that.

I will try to address that in a number of ways and will then bring in Stephen Lea-Ross. The pilot buildings were identified, and the risk criteria are important. I talked about the breadth and what we need to do with RSLs and local authorities. They should have a list of buildings that fall into the category. The discussions that we will have with RSLs and local authorities will go into that in more detail. Local authorities have a responsibility to make sure that they have the data in place. In the discussions, we are trying to home in on that particular figure. Stephen Lea-Ross can say more about where we see that going.

I also mentioned the open call. If there are buildings that have not been picked up, what do we do about that and how do we take that forward? As part of the pilot programme, 107 buildings were identified, and that programme enabled us to learn, to pick things up and to deal with those that are most at risk.

Stephen, do you want to add anything on the open call, on local authorities and RSLs, and on how we intend to take that work forward? I return to my point about increasing the breadth.

I have written to local authorities and we hope to meet as soon as possible—it will probably be very early in the new year—to try to identify that and firm it up. The same applies with RSLs. There is immediacy around this work. They will have existing information that we need, and that is an important aspect. Stephen Lea-Ross mentioned the information that we have, but in some cases more thorough investigation will be needed, rather than just the desktop information that we have. In setting out the budget this year, we tried to estimate what is needed.

As I think I mentioned at the time, we have talked about the consequentials coming through from the UK Government. The money has been spent as quickly as possible this year. If there is demand to spend more money this year, I will take that up with Government colleagues. However, we need to know what we need to know, if you know what I mean. That is an incredibly important part of it.

In addition, discussions are continuing with developers about the levy. They need to play their part in that regard. That has been well discussed and it is well established. We are in consultation with them at the moment. Although we have talked about the breadth, it is also about trying to home in and determine the timescales. We will come back to the committee once we have had the discussions with the local authorities. RSLs are slightly different because they do not have an umbrella group, but we are also engaging with them.

The work is very much based on risk-based assessment of where we are and identifying the most important parts. If risks are identified, we will put in place mitigations to make sure that they are lessened.

Stephen, do you want to add anything on that?

The annual report can cover that as well. Meghan Gallacher was quite right to ask the question. This time next year, we should be able to come back and say, “This is what we have done with local authorities, RSLs and so on, and this is how it has developed”. We need to increase the breadth of the work for the reason that was mentioned in the question. We need to identify where the risks are, mitigate them and get on with moving the SBA process on. I think that the committee will quite rightly ask the same question next year.

I am happy to do that. A number of local authorities have been impacted, including West Lothian Council, Aberdeen City Council and Clackmannanshire Council, and there have been impacts outside housing as well.

Your point about finance and insurance is important. Those are reserved matters, but we have had discussions about them. In Aberdeen, we have had UK Finance involved in discussions to try to give advice to people who own their properties, and the Association of British Insurers has also been involved in giving advice.

Each local authority will have a different mix. Aberdeen has a mixture of private owners and council tenants. I think that parts of West Lothian will be the same, as will Clackmannanshire. The local authorities will be assessing their options. We are in discussions with all three of them and we will continue those.

In discussions with the previous UK Government, it said that, on RAAC, the amount that would be spent would be what was required. We have written to the new UK Government on that and I am still to hear from it formally on that point. We will need to sit down with it and have discussions on that.

I am aware that the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee is considering a petition on the matter, and I suspect that I will be asked to appear at that committee at some stage, but I do not have a date for that.

We continue to engage with local authorities on RAAC. I will raise the issue when I meet my UK Government colleague, but we still await a reply from the UK Government on financing that work. We will continue to push it on the matter. As I said, I have met the local authorities on that. If Mr Griffin wants to write to me about visiting others, I will be happy to consider that.

Craig Campbell might be able to give a little bit more information.

I will come on to discuss the submission from Crisis, but Mr Griffin makes an important point. In terms of complexity, the benefit system more broadly needs to be simplified. We will continue to discuss that with Crisis.

In terms of its feedback on the LCM, Crisis obviously has front-line experience of the complexity of the benefits system. It is an important point, but it is much broader than this piece of legislation. Simplification of the benefits system is something that we would need to speak to the UK Government about.

Do colleagues have anything else to add on what Crisis said? No?

In that case, I am happy to come back to you on that, Mr Griffin, but I think that the point that Crisis has raised is much broader than just this piece of legislation. We are always discussing the issue in terms of the Housing (Scotland) Bill and where the benefits system fits in, because it can overly complicate things. I am happy to take the point away and come back to you. Maybe we can take it up with Crisis. You have raised a very good point, but it is much broader than this piece of legislation.

That comes down to the technical discussions that are going on. I have met the developers on the issue, and I mentioned that I would be available for discussions at any time. About three or four meetings have taken place already. We are now down to the point of agreeing the technicalities. Without prejudice to any discussions, I am confident that we will have something early in the new year on which we can write to the committee.

Our approach is very much like the one that we used for the discussions on the SBA. We have been working hand in hand with the developers, and that has been the process over the past number of weeks and months.

I will bring in Stephen Lea-Ross to cover the technical aspects of the discussions.