Seòmar agus comataidhean

There are two ways to look at that. First, there would have to be data to back that up.

Secondly, it is the right of the minister to look at that and say whether they would impose rent controls in an area. If a local authority says that it wants to look at rent controls, the minister at the time can say that they do not agree with that, so the rent controls would not just come in. There is flexibility for the Government and the minister to look at that and say that they do not think that there is a case for rent controls at that particular time. The key thing is that it has to be backed up by data. There would be discussions—it is not something that would happen overnight. It would have to go out for broader consultation. The key thing is that the minister would have the right to say whether rent controls could be brought in, depending on the local circumstances at that particular time. A local authority might want to do it, but the minister might not agree and would have to give reasons for that. The ability to look at that goes both ways.

Again, I think that Yvette Sheppard talked about such circumstances. First, as she touched on, there would be an option for us to go back if we think that the data is not sufficient. If that is still the case when the data comes back, we would have to take it as an individual circumstance, but I think that the minister has the ability to do what you said. There are a number of points before we even get to that regarding whether the data that the authority provides backs up sufficiently what it proposes. That is where issues of broader local consideration come in.

I do not know whether Yvette wants to add anything other than what was added before. Again, there is the procedure of looking at the data that comes forward to work out whether we think that the data that the authority has collected is sufficient and sufficiently supports what it proposes.

It might be the other way round—the authority might come forward and say that it does or does not recommend a rent control area. There are different circumstances. I do not know whether Yvette wants to add anything to what she added before.

I will try to keep them short.

Thank you, convener and members of the committee, and good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to set out the vision for the Housing (Scotland) Bill and, in particular, how the measures can help us to build on our existing protections to deliver a private rented sector that works for tenants and landlords, and plays a part in eradicating child poverty.

I understand that the committee intends to provide its stage 1 report in the coming weeks, and I am grateful for your time today. In my evidence to the Social Justice and Social Security Committee on 27 June and 5 September, I highlighted key measures in parts 5 and 6 of the bill on homelessness prevention duties, domestic abuse and fuel poverty. In this meeting, I will focus on the actions that we are taking on other measures in parts 1 to 4 of the bill, such as rent control; increased eviction protection; rights for tenants to request a pet and not be unreasonably refused; and rights for private tenants to make changes to a rented home.

The legislation as introduced builds on the strong housing rights that already exist for people in Scotland, with its renewed focus on supporting tenancies to be sustained, which in turn will lead to less pressure on housing supply. The package of reforms as set out in the bill are, therefore, focused on helping to ensure that people have a safe, secure and affordable place to live. The measures in the bill introduce changes that are positive for both tenants and responsible landlords—for example, by reforming how civil damages for unlawful eviction are calculated; enabling unclaimed tenancy deposit funds to be used for the benefit of private rented sector tenants; and providing a mechanism for joint tenants to end a tenancy in cases when there is no mutual agreement. Due to time constraints, I will not talk about those and the other issues in the bill in detail, however, I am happy to answer any questions that the committee has.

I will turn first to rent control. As I set out in my letter to the committee, I remain committed to delivering our vision for a fairer, well-managed private rented sector that works in the interests of tenants and landlords, and supports on-going investment in rented housing. The bill as introduced sets out the framework for how rent control will be delivered, and I have continued to listen to stakeholders’ views on the benefits of providing more clarity on how rent control would apply. In particular, we have considered the need to set out how rent increases will be capped in areas in which rent controls will apply. To support that, I will lodge amendments at stage 2 that set out how the rent cap will apply in rent control areas. That will provide clarity for all, including tenants, landlords and investors. It will build on the provisions that are already set out in the bill to deliver rent controls, which will involve the designation of rent control areas on a geographically specific basis, supported by a local assessment process, which will be carried out by local authorities. That is to ensure that measures can be tailored to the prevailing rent conditions in a localised area and respond to changing circumstances.

Rent control areas will be designated through affirmative regulations with a requirement for consultation ahead of the regulations being laid. The bill already sets out that a rent control area can be designated only when it is necessary and proportionate for the purpose of protecting the social and economic interests of tenants in that area, and when it is a necessary and proportionate control of a landlord’s use of their property in that area. Furthermore, a rent control area can be designated for only a fixed time period of five years. Redesignation beyond the set period would require to be on the basis that further assessment shows that that would be required. The bill also allows ministers to provide for circumstances in which the rent cap does not apply or in which rent may increase by more than the rent cap.

Secondly, the bill places duties on the tribunal and courts to consider whether there should be a delay to the enforcement of an eviction. That action responds to concerns about the potential negative impact of the timing of an enforcement of an eviction on tenants and the fact that there are certain circumstances and times of year during which being evicted can be particularly problematic. The bill sets out specific factors that the tribunal and courts may take into account when deciding whether it is reasonable to delay an enforcement, such as seasonal pressures, periods of religious significance, exam periods, or where more time is required to access suitable alternative accommodation. The measures recognise that there are certain types of eviction where it would rarely be reasonable for the enforcement to be delayed. Therefore, the bill includes exemptions from the duty for certain repossession grounds such as antisocial conduct, criminal convictions, domestic abuse and vacant and abandoned properties.

Finally, on personalisation and keeping a pet, the bill also introduces a statutory framework for private residential tenants to make certain changes to their home and to keep a pet. There will be a right for tenants, including social tenants, to ask to keep a pet and not be unreasonably refused.

With regard to personalising a rented home, there will be different categories of change. Category 1 changes will not require a tenant to request permission for a change; category 2 changes must be requested, but cannot be unreasonably refused by a landlord. Details of the types of changes under each category will be set out in secondary legislation and will be subject to further consultation.

In relation to personalisation and pets, the bill sets clear timescales for requests to make changes, and regulates how disputes will be managed; for private rented sector cases, that will be done through the First-tier Tribunal for Scotland.

Overall, the measures in the bill are part of our vision for the rented sector in Scotland—we aim to improve affordability and strengthen tenants’ rights, while helping to sustain tenancies for the benefit of tenants and landlords.

I continue to listen to the information that stakeholders share and I will bring forward the amendments at stage 2 that I referred to, once we have had the opportunity to consider in further detail how the options will take account of the interests of tenants and landlords, while also encouraging investment.

My officials and I look forward to answering any questions that members might have on these parts of the bill.

I am keen to look at that more broadly outwith the bill. I have met the Scottish Association of Landlords on a number of occasions, and we have another meeting coming up. One of the key issues is that there has to be a tripartite agreement and almost a strategic approach. That includes not just the Scottish Government, landlords and investors but local authorities. In discussions with local authorities, we are trying to work with them to understand what the private rented sector looks like in Glasgow and in Edinburgh and what other roles it has in other parts of Scotland. When I have meetings with local authorities, I always ask them about the role of their private rented sector.

I have a meeting with John Blackwood and the Scottish Association of Landlords to talk about what that approach looks like. How do we get a closer relationship between the Government, the rented sector and local authorities? We will explore that and see what we can do there. The private rented sector is an incredibly important part of striking the balance with housing, but it is different in every part of Scotland, so it needs slightly different approaches. That is an important aspect.

I mentioned Edinburgh and Glasgow because when we look at rent increases we see that they are areas that have been under pressure. I think that that is down to supply and demand, and to much broader measures. I talked about how we might bring forward strategic sites in Edinburgh and Glasgow. We have had discussions in Edinburgh and Glasgow on that; for example, I asked the Edinburgh city region body to produce a report on the eight strategic sites there and to say what is required to bring them forward and the time for that, because the quicker we can increase supply, the better. That is basic economics around supply and demand. Glasgow is similar—a broader approach will be taken through looking at the city region.

When you look at rent increases in different parts of Scotland, you sometimes see rent increases that are quite low. I have visited parts of Scotland—for example, Inverclyde—that have that opposite problem. Therefore, the local approach is really important. I am not saying that the controls need to be in Edinburgh and Glasgow—that is not a Government target. I gave those as examples because they are the areas where large rent increases have been identified.

Obviously, we would consult the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and the local authorities on what that looks like, and we would look at the data behind that to be sure about what is taken forward. The process has to be done in consultation with local authorities and based on the data. As I have mentioned, we need to do a little more on the data and to work with local authorities on that. For example, I talked about the size of the PRS in Edinburgh and Glasgow. I would like to see closer collaboration between local authorities, the PRS and the Government on what the sector looks like, its opportunity to grow and its role in tackling homelessness. How do we incentivise people to come back into the PRS? That is a much broader approach.

There is also a need to consult the local community on what rent controls actually look like. However, we need to have flexibility in the system, based on what is required in Edinburgh and in Glasgow. A rent control area will be set out for a period of time, but if we find that the data changes over the period, the rent controls might not stay in place. If there are changes in the economy, we will have the flexibility to remove the rent controls at those times.

I gave Edinburgh and Glasgow as examples because those are the areas where the largest rent increases have been.

On the general question of personalisation, I met the Dogs Trust before I was a minister and, knowing that a housing bill would be coming up, the trust raised that issue. It said that it can be helpful for an elderly person, or for someone who cannot get out of their home because of illness, to have a dog as a companion. That was raised two and a bit years ago, before I was a minister, and I think that it is really important.

I have visited the Scottish Association of Landlords to talk about the matter. Procedure is the key thing and must be in place. Is the pet a wee Chihuahua or a Great Dane? I might be exaggerating, but the dog has to be appropriate to the size of the property. To me, the onus should be on the tenant to look at that, but we are trying to be as flexible as possible. We will see what that looks like in more detail when the regulations come in.

Regarding landlords, it is all about making sure that they are aware of the procedure and that they have the ability, within reason, to say, for example, that you cannot have a Great Dane in a one-bedroom flat. It is about recognising the importance of people having pets as companions and striking the balance. That is a key thing.

At the time when I visited the rent deposit scheme, which was about a year ago, there were issues to do with Covid and people moving in and out again reasonably quickly. I am not too sure why there was that increase at that time. Charlotte McHaffie might have something else to say on that.

There is an onus on the landlord to take as much information as possible at the start of the process. If a tenant changes their only email address or their mobile phone number, which could be their only number, it becomes difficult. As I said, the onus is on the landlord to get as much information as they can. There is also a responsibility on the tenant to provide as much information as possible, but it should be made clear at the start of the process that there is a substantial amount of money sitting there.

You mentioned the substantial increases, Mr MacDonald. I imagine that the situation is partly down to Covid, but it is not just about that. We cannot have a situation where an international student changes their email address and is forgotten about. There are also questions about how we liaise with universities and whether we get information from them. There are issues around the general data protection regulation, but we have to maximise the information that we have on tenants, because a substantial amount of money is sitting there.

The bill touches on how the money may be used, which is restricted. It mentions the provision of

“information or assistance to private tenants in relation to their rights”

and

“other services or facilities that promote or support the interests of such tenants”,

and work that involves

“preventing private tenants from becoming homeless”.

The funds can be used, but we have to discuss how we support tenants specifically. I think that deposits are treated as unclaimed after five years. We need to decrease the amount of money that is unclaimed and, if we cannot reduce the money that is left, ensure that it is used to protect and support tenants’ rights.

There is recognition of that. I touched on the data point earlier. The new deal for tenants touched on data.

I will touch on the specifics, but the relationship between local authorities, the Government and the PRS is important. How do we strengthen that? How do we ensure that there is a closer relationship at the local housing strategy level, investment level and planning level? What does that look like? That gives you the overarching relationship that I would like to develop, because it is important. I have discussed that with local authorities and the Scottish Association of Landlords. We have a meeting at which we will discuss that in a wee bit more detail, which is important.

There is already work under way on data, because we will need it to determine rent controls for local areas in the future. If we do not have data, we will make assumptions based on data that might not be accurate. The key thing is how we develop the data that is needed. We are discussing that in detail with local authorities.

Yvette might want to touch on that in more detail, but I have that discussion with councillor colleagues and officials. That is a key part. Yvette might want to add something else on the logistics of how it works, but there are continuing discussions.