Seòmar agus comataidhean

Yes—importantly, it was about the budget. In the resource planning allocations, we gave a five-year allocation of £3.6 billion. It was important to give certainty over five years. We are not always able to give multiyear allocations, because of all the difficulties in budgeting that we all understand. However, being able to do so has made quite a difference in terms of being able to give that certainty. That can help plans to go forward, so that, through their own borrowing, projects can generate added value to that £3.6 billion. In some cases, projects have doubled their funding.

That said, we are always looking for innovative ways of financing the affordable housing supply programme. We have looked at how we can use financial transactions to the best of our ability. Financial transactions funding of £134 million has been allocated to the budget in 2022-23. Use of FTs is quite complicated. It is not straightforward. However, we can helpfully use them.

We have also allocated £74 million to the charitable bond scheme in 2022-23, to provide private finance to RSLs and to generate charitable donations to increase provision of social housing.

We are trying to be imaginative in how we might make the money go further, if you like. We have asked officials to establish what is called an innovative finance steering group to look at innovative finance models that we have perhaps not used, in order to grow that pot even further.

We are constantly challenging ourselves, quite apart from our taking up the challenge that comes externally, because we want to do more. The sum of £3.6 billion over the current session of Parliament is a lot of money, but we need to grow it. We can grow it through the private finance that RSLs can raise and through contributions from local authorities, but if there is more that we can do for some additional programmes, we will look to do it.

The steering group will be established in the autumn. We need to give it a bit of latitude to look at all the potential sources of investment. I would not want to rule anything out, but it will ultimately be for the Government to look at the group’s recommendations. We will look at the risks, because I am mindful that anything that is directly linked to fluctuations on an on-going yearly basis could have an immediate negative impact on rent levels. That would not be a sustainable position for tenants to find themselves in. Anything that we do in relation to innovative finance has to be sustainable and has to give tenants some security in relation to affordability of rent levels.

Mid-market rents provide an important function for those who are able to afford those rents, which are still considerably lower than rents in the private rented sector. They meet a particular need for some parts of the population, which is important. There has been expansion of mid-market rents, which will continue to be an important element. There might be some financing models that can help with that part of the market.

However, we will apply any recommendations having looked at them through the lenses of affordability and sustainability.

There has been no consultation on any housing elements of the bill, certainly as far as my interests are concerned.

We have made clear our position on the bill and our concerns about it, which have been well rehearsed. Although housing policy is entirely devolved, we have no control over matters such as housing benefit, mortgage tax relief and levers that drive inflation and interest rates, all of which impact on housing.

However, the fact that delivery of housing, building of housing and building regulations are entirely devolved matters has allowed us to develop a distinctive Scottish approach that recognises the importance of affordable housing as a key lever in tackling poverty. One of the reasons why child poverty levels are lower in Scotland is the relative affordability of housing in Scotland when compared with elsewhere. We have been able to take a different approach on, for example, the right to buy, security of tenure and energy efficiency.

We would be very concerned if there was any move that would impact on that area of devolved policy. That is one of many concerns that we have about mission creep, if you like, by the UK Government into devolved matters.

The very limited scope of the Scottish Government’s powers to borrow affects not just housing but the whole gamut of our ability to respond, whether in respect of social security measures or borrowing during the Covid pandemic to support households and businesses, which is what every other Government did. We are very constrained, which places huge barriers and restrictions before us. It means that within what is, largely, a fixed budget, we have to prioritise, so increased spending in one area means reduced spending in another. That is why the fiscal framework must be reviewed as a matter of urgency; finance colleagues have been working with the UK Government to try to agree the parameters of that.

Borrowing powers clearly have to be a key aspect of any revision of the fiscal framework so that we can operate like other Governments, including many devolved Governments. Even local government has more borrowing powers than the Scottish Government. It is a critical issue; an increase in borrowing powers would allow us far more flexibility to be able to respond to peaks and troughs, the challenges of global factors and emergency events that come up, such as the cost of living crisis. It would allow us to respond far better than we can through our fixed budget.

I am happy to write to the committee with that detail.

Brexit, alongside a number of other issues, is having an impact. It has had a direct impact on labour supply and on materials at a time when such issues are being exacerbated, as we are aware, by global supply issues, such as the war in Ukraine, and Covid. All of those things have created a very difficult environment.

We have been working with the construction sector. Ivan McKee has been leading work around support for the construction sector. Those factors are global factors and it is very difficult for the Scottish Government to resolve them ourselves, but we can look at, for example, the development of local supply chains. We can consider the importance of small and medium-sized enterprises in Scotland in how we create more local supply chains. That will not happen overnight, but it is important that we look to do that in order to have more stability in the system. If we can get that stability and resilience in those local supply chains, the system will not be as buffeted in the future. That comes back to looking at local timber supplies, off-site construction—all the things that can perhaps help us to be less reliant on global factors.

It is a really challenging time for the construction sector. Having said that, projects are still coming in. On the costs of those projects, around half are coming in under benchmark and half are coming in over benchmark. The good news is that projects are still coming in and they are still being approved. That means that we are still getting shovels in the ground, to help towards that affordable housing supply programme target.

I will bring Alastair Dee back in.

Covid had a big impact, in that it paused construction. We have also talked about issues including Brexit. Those things led to a drop in building, then there was an increase, again. There are peaks and troughs. As we go forward to 2032, external factors will continue to have an impact. The announcements last Friday, the shock to the markets, the increase in interest rates and so on will have other impacts, but we will not see the figures on that for another year.

The peaks and troughs are why I talked about the midpoint of the review to 2032, to take stock of where we have got to and of whether there is a need to back-end any catch-up that might be required, should we have such impacts.

I have forgotten the other bit of your question.

As I have said, it is borne out of the strategic housing plans from local authorities and consultations with local authorities and registered social landlords. The target must be ambitious and it must be deliverable. There is no point in our plucking a target out of thin air that is not deliverable. We have had calls to go further, but whatever we do must be deliverable. The 110,000 target, of which 10 per cent will be rural housing, is stretching, not least in the current climate of cost pressures.

It is important that we have a stretching target. Our target is fit for purpose, but we must keep it under review. The midpoint will be important in assessing the progress towards the target.

I should also say that the target is not one that will be met by breaking it down into individual years, with the same number of homes being delivered each year. The challenges and the costs will change so the target will be met in peaks and troughs as we moved towards 2032. The midpoint is important in letting us see what progress is being made and whether there need to be changes at that point.

It was important for fairness that the approach should apply to both the private and social rented sectors, because it will set the framework for anything that happens after March. We are looking at six months in this context, but we are putting in the levers for what might happen beyond those six months.

It is important that the social rented sector looks at what it can do to support tenants—as it has already done and will continue to do. Every time that I have had a meeting with the social rented sector, whether that was with individual RSLs or the SFHA, I have been struck by people’s absolute determination to support their tenants. They do that by minimising rent increases, making sure that tenants are aware of and supported through any rent arrears that they have, and avoiding eviction, which is very much a last resort. The social rented sector is doing all that and will continue to do it, and that is important.

Of course, Government has taken other action to support the sector and tenants directly through increased support through discretionary housing payments and the ability to consider not just rent arrears but support for energy costs through that mechanism. There is also the tenant grant fund, which we are pivoting towards dealing with the cost of living, and we will keep that under review in the emergency budget review. We are considering how we can support tenants to avoid rent arrears and to tackle rent arrears when they arise. That is not the only action that we are taking—there are many other supports as well.