Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you, convener. I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on this year’s short-term lets implementation update report and answer questions about the evidence that you have gathered from stakeholders.

I note that the committee received 19 responses in total. Just under half came from local authorities, under a third came from industry organisations and the remainder came from Government bodies, festival organisations and two community groups. Everything included in those responses mirrors views that have already been shared with the Scottish Government. We were confused by a few local authorities saying that we had not involved them, as we had and they contributed to the report. From reading some of the responses that the committee received, I think that there was perhaps a misunderstanding about the engagement that we did for the report and the committee’s call for evidence.

As the report outlines, the feedback that we received broadly fell under the following headings: calls to improve guidance; calls to amend legislation; and asks that were out of scope. We have committed to actions to address the first two areas, and I note that the evidence that you received broadly endorses that approach.

Considerable feedback was gathered from a range of stakeholders and sources. We have been careful not to draw conclusions, as we feel that there is not yet sufficient data available to assess impacts.

The report provides early insights and information on initial short-term licence application levels across Scotland, considers current operational processes and identifies operational improvements, including Scottish Government actions, where appropriate. We have already made operational adjustments to the licensing scheme as a direct result of feedback from a range of stakeholders.

I understand that some groups within the sector want us to halt the present regulation and undertake a review. We have committed to on-going monitoring, but it would not be responsible to review regulation that has only just been implemented and is still in a transitional phase, especially for a sector that has invested in compliance and because licensing is meeting its purpose of ensuring consistent safety standards.

We will continue to work with and listen to stakeholders. I am pleased to inform the committee that, as well as the regular engagement that we already have in place, the first meeting of the guidance expert group that is being facilitated by VisitScotland will take place later this month.

We have already said that we are open to undertaking further consultation once the guidance work concludes. We cannot address that through guidance and we need to gather wider views before deciding how to proceed.

I am happy to answer any questions that the committee has.

I will bring in Anita Stewart in a second because she has been dealing with that as well. When we set out the wider scheme, we talked about bed and breakfasts and guest houses—we have talked about them previously with the committee. With home letting, it was a case of seeing how that settled down. We have issued guidance to local authorities on that point.

The point that I made right at the very start is that the process is all about safety and compliance, which are of paramount importance in what we are looking for. I will bring in Anita Stewart to add to that.

You will know, convener, that I was a member of the committee when we first discussed short-term lets, and I listened to some of the concerns about the issue at that time.

Government ministers have met the Association of Scotland’s Self-Caterers on about 10 occasions—I have met it on seven occasions so far—so we are obviously listening to it regularly. We have also met and engaged with the Scottish Tourism Alliance. We have spoken to the likes of Booking.com, Airbnb and so on a number of times as well. Indeed, they met with the previous First Minister, Mr Yousaf, and the current Deputy First Minister, and they endorsed our approach of looking at the review, seeing what we need to do and seeing how things bed down.

We have been listening to providers. We might not have agreed with all the points that they have raised but we have certainly listened to them. We are not downplaying. As part of the process, we are saying that people should look at the implementation update and let things bed down a little. We have made changes already. We have listened and will continue to listen, and I have made that commitment when meeting providers.

We have also engaged with the Society of Local Authority Lawyers and Administrators. Local authorities are the licensing bodies, and we get feedback from the sector on the time taken to process applications and how those are assessed using local interpretation, on which we have tried to work with SOLAR.

We have worked with providers face to face and through local authorities to pick up issues that they have had with local authorities as well. We have issued further guidance, as required, following feedback from the ASSC and the STA, for example.

It is very much an on-going process and we have mentioned that to the providers regularly.

There are a number of points. I spoke to the SBBA too. I go right back to when the policy was brought in, when there was a discussion and decision as to whether the scheme was going to be a national scheme or, as with many licensing schemes in Scotland, whether it was going to be a local, or local authority, scheme.

It is up to local authorities to interpret the guidance and, at the beginning, each local authority interpreted it slightly differently. We have had meetings with SOLAR—the body that represents the licensing authorities in Scotland—on that. Guidance was issued about what to do if there was an issue around one authority interpreting part of the scheme differently from another. We tried to speak to SOLAR regularly.

I will bring in Anita Stewart to talk a little bit more about her involvement with local authorities. This is about trying to get national consistency but with local interpretation. Part of the review that we are talking about will look at that and see what we can do to further strengthen the guidance.

Anita, you spoke directly to SOLAR and so on. Do you want to say any more about the work that you have done on that point?

A balance needs to be struck when it comes to providing flexibility, whether we are talking about exemptions for a couple of one-off events or for the festival, which runs for a month, but people probably start to come into the city about two weeks beforehand in order to start preparing and so on. It is a case of trying to provide that flexibility.

The discussions that I had with the festival and fringe organisations were about that six-week period, in which flexibility is key, given the extent to which visitor numbers increase. It is a case of achieving that balance, and that is part of the review that is being looked at.

Once the recommendations have come forward and we have had a look at them, I will be happy to write to the committee on that point.

The important point, Mr Griffin, regarding the expert group being pulled together, is that it will look at all that in a little more detail. We will see what recommendations the group comes up with. It is down to the interpretation of each local authority in terms of planning and not just regarding short-term lets. They will have different interpretations of planning guidance and I think that that is the key thing. We will listen to what the expert group says and obviously discuss it with planning colleagues also.

Part of that was done through the implementation update. The issues that have been raised by the committee today need to feed into the discussions with the expert group, which is chaired by VisitScotland. We will mention those issues to colleagues on the group. We have committed to look at the pros and cons of a change, and the expert group will need to consider those, too. I am happy to write to the committee on the considerations in that regard, because you have raised an important point.

I will bring in Anita Stewart on that point, as she has been working on the figures over a period of time.

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.