Seòmar agus comataidhean

As the convener said, we are moving on to the theme of powers to provide support. Part 2 of the bill gives Scottish ministers the power to establish a new funding and support system for Scottish agriculture. I have a number of questions in that area, some of which we started to touch on under theme 1, so I might not rehearse that.

As the convener keeps saying, we are now at the business end of this process, so I am interested in hearing whether you believe that the powers in the bill will enable ministers to ensure that there is a just transition not just for farmers but for the wider rural community. That comes in the context of the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, Net Zero and Just Transition’s recent announcement on the climate adaptation plan. Do you think that the powers will be enough to get us to where we need to be for both farmers and rural communities?

I have a couple of more detailed questions. I will ask them both and then direct them at folk—I just want to let people know that they are coming their way.

For Douglas Bell and Theona Morrison, I have a question on tenant farmers and crofters. The bill creates powers to support

“the use of land for woodlands where that use is ancillary to the farming of the land for other agricultural purposes.”

I presume that that might include support for the croft woodlands that are being called for as well as agroforestry, parkland and silvopasture. I am interested in hearing your thoughts on whether tenant farmers and crofters benefit from that kind of support. If not, what can we do to ensure that they get it?

That was my first question. I have another question relating to just transition that I will direct at Theona, again, and Steven Thomson. I think that both of you have already touched on the issue of support not having been provided for small-scale local fruit and vegetable producers. It has been coming up in conversations that I have been having all across my region, and I would be interested in understanding whether you have any sense of the importance of that sector to rural communities, food security and local economies. Are there enough provisions—enough hooks—in the bill to ensure that we can bring that support forward?

Good morning, and welcome to the fourth meeting in 2024 of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee. I remind all members and witnesses to ensure that their devices are on silent and that all other notifications are turned off during the meeting.

The first item on our agenda is to decide whether to take business in private. Do members agree to take items 3 and 4 in private?

Members indicated agreement.

Thanks for that. We now turn to questions from members. Please indicate if you would like to come in to respond to a member’s question or to something else that has been said. For those of you who are joining us online, please indicate if you would like to respond to a question by putting an R in the chat function. Some of our questions will be directed specifically to one person, potentially because they have the expertise on that subject. The intention is that this should be a free-flowing conversation rather than a question-and-answer session, so let us see how we get on with that.

I will begin with a couple of questions. What is your perspective on the fact that the Scottish Government has not publicly consulted on the proposals in the bill? Have your organisations had any opportunity to input into its development and, if so, how effective has the engagement been in improving the bill that we are considering?

That is very helpful.

I will bring in Alan McAulay, who is online. Has Local Authority Building Standards Scotland been involved?

Thank you. Jim McGonigal, has the Institution of Fire Engineers been involved?

I will stay with you for my second question, but anyone else can come in on it. I am interested in your thoughts on the focus and scope of the bill. Should the bill focus solely on cladding remediation or should it extend to cover all fire safety issues—or even all significant building safety matters?

The second item on our agenda is to take evidence from two panels of witnesses on the Housing (Cladding Remediation) (Scotland) Bill, with the first session taking the form of a round-table discussion. We are joined in the room by Phil Diamond, who is the managing director at Diamond and Company, Jocelyne Fleming, who is the policy and public affairs officer at the Chartered Institute of Building, Gary Strong, who is the head of professional practice at the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, and Kate Swinburne, who is the associate director at OFR Consultants. We are joined online by Alan McAulay, who is building standards hub pilot director at Local Authority Building Standards Scotland, and Jim McGonigal, who is joining us from the Institution of Fire Engineers. I welcome our witnesses to the meeting.

I will begin our conversation by inviting everyone to introduce themselves. I am Ariane Burgess, a member of the Scottish Parliament for the Highlands and Islands region and the convener of the committee.

Before I bring in Phil Diamond and then Alan McAulay, I will bring up something with you, Gary, although I know that others have made this point. We have heard that the bill is a good first step. Is there a sense from the work that you have been doing on the cladding working group and the directorate that there is more to come and that we need to do this because there is an urgency to get moving on it? I understand the point that, if you are going to assess a building, you should do the whole package. The committee is just seeing this piece of proposed legislation, but is there more in the pipeline that is being considered?

Thanks, Alan, that is helpful. It is about how to parse out the issue. It is important to find the right way—or as close to that as possible—to look at it.