Seòmar agus comataidhean

First, the warmer homes Scotland scheme is a Scottish Government scheme that is separate from the warm homes plan, which has not been introduced yet. The plan is due to be introduced, but I do not know what the UK Government will introduce with it. Although that is unsatisfactory, it is the way it is, and I will keep pressing for detail.

Secondly, I understand that we want to give certainty to the sector because there is huge opportunity—for example, in heat networks—and I want that opportunity to be realised. At the same time, the bill is a highly complex piece of legislation, and it is incumbent on me and my officials to get it right. It is not aided by the fact that we do not know what Scotland’s other Government intends to do in respect of warm homes. I am continuing to press for more detail on that and to try to refine the bill. It remains my intention today to introduce the bill and to have it passed.

There is a tipping point after which the Scottish Government might have to move ahead.

Those plans are tied up, too. In the same way that it could affect the bill, the warm homes plan could affect what Ms Martin will take forward in the climate change plan.

I am very happy to answer that, convener. Quite a bit of secondary legislation will emerge from the Housing (Scotland) Bill. I am sure that the committee will be delighted to know that and will look forward to discussing it with us. The implementation of Awaab’s law will be a key part of that. When we were finalising stage 3, I was keen to make the commitment that it would be in force from March next year. Therefore, the intention is to lay those regulations very early in the new year. We have already started to do the work to develop what will be in those regulations.

As the committee can imagine, we need to make sure that the differences between the sectors are taken into account, as well as what is realistic for landlords and protective for tenants. It is helpful that similar work is on-going across the rest of the UK, which I am keeping a close eye on.

I might get you a written update on that, convener. We will be on track to deliver against the PFG commitment. A lot of what I have been doing has been around reviewing the regulatory landscape as it is. That was an economy-led piece of work. The Cabinet sub-committee on economy and investment is the main interface between the Deputy First Minister and me. Housing has been a key part of that, and we have discussed some of the regulatory work around that. I will be happy to update the committee on the delivery of that piece of work in the PFG.

Jess Niven and I mentioned doing work on net zero and energy efficiency regulations, and it is also worth letting the committee know that I have asked the Government’s regulatory review group to assist me in that and, basically, to present to me what a reasonable sequencing would be. Again, that will be part of the work on the PFG agreement, and I will be glad to update the committee in writing. I am sorry that I do not have more information on it today.

I am certainly concerned to make sure that developers who were responsible for the construction of a building with potentially dangerous cladding are contracted to deal with that.

We are talking about a significant programme of substantial costs, much of which the public purse will meet.

Developers signed the 2023 accord, and the developer remediation contract, which we are now negotiating for signature, is on largely similar terms. We have had agreement for a number of years that this was the direction of travel. It is now about turning that accord into the contract and having it signed.

I am of a similar mind to you, because during the summer update on cladding, I was keen to make sure that a deadline was set for the signature of the contract, and I have set 31 October. That is not really a reflection of any concern on my part that developers will not sign it. We are on very good terms and are exchanging drafts. Ultimately, it is just about bookending it and saying that there will be a point after which the contract will be signed and we will move on. I think that it will line up quite well with the rest of the single open call taking off.

That is the estimated expenditure, and the Building Safety Levy (Scotland) Bill, which my colleague Ivan McKee is taking through the Parliament, will make a contribution to that cost of around £30 million per annum from 2027. That is the expected provision.

Yes, and I would probably start with your final point, namely that, when you consider that the public purse might contribute between £1.7 billion and £3.1 billion to a very important matter, which we absolutely need to do and will do, £30 million per annum is a small contribution. Therefore, I am very supportive of the building safety levy in order that it can contribute to the overall costs. That is not to say that I do not understand that there are concerns, particularly from smaller operators, and I have already discussed this, in relation to small and medium-sized enterprises, with Homes for Scotland. Therefore, I am open-minded about ensuring proportionality in the way that the building safety levy operates, but it must operate, because we need that contribution to what is a significant task with a large price tag.

I will address those two questions separately: first on monitoring and then on the indicators. The plan having been completed, my attention is immediately focused on its delivery and on tracking that delivery. As the plan deals with issues ranging from protection from domestic abuse through to flipping and acquisition of existing houses and building and planning, it requires me to work across Government. I have set up a group of officials who will report to me fortnightly. I will have a written update on a weekly basis and a fortnightly meeting, at which representatives of the teams across Government will report to me on how each of the 20 actions is being taken forward. That is an internal, good-governance piece of work. I also have the Cabinet sub-committee on economy and investment, which the Deputy First Minister leads. Housing is a big part of that, so that is another way in which we manage internal delivery.

Externally, the housing to 2040 board will meet shortly, for the first time since the housing emergency action plan was published. I have taken a bit of time to consider how we might pivot to having that board oversee the delivery of the plan, as well as our wider 2040 ambitions—none of which, incidentally, has been replaced by the plan; they have been added to.

There is a really important piece of work with the folks whom I am relying on to deliver the plan, chief among them being local authorities and registered social landlords. Early in post I had a suite of meetings with the leaders of the five councils with the most strained homelessness situations, and I will now do another suite. I am very likely to put that on a quarterly basis, which will involve understanding the pressures that those councils face now and how they are implementing the plan to make it work.

On the point about indicators, I was pleased to work with Mark Griffin on his amendment to the Housing (Scotland) Bill that concerned the housing emergency—how we know when we are in it and when we are coming out of it. We will now work to implement that provision. It needs to be carefully done. As we all know, Argyll and Bute was the first council to declare a housing emergency, and coming out of that will look very different there from what it will look like in Glasgow. We need indicators that are specific but also broad enough to reflect different circumstances.

I will bring in Matthew Elsby on that, because it predates my time, and I expect that it is an official-led piece of work.