Seòmar agus comataidhean

So it might be an overestimate, but that is the case for good reason.

I will come back to you on that point specifically.

Although the issues that stakeholders raised with me included an element of the impact on land value and also whether behaviour will pass that on to house prices and whether that would then be a deterrent, their main issue was the cumulative impact—it not just about one impact, but what it looks like when it is all added up together. I said that we were very cognisant of that and were mindful that, if other things were to impact on the sector—on land value and house prices—we had to think of it in that context.

However, we will come back to you on your specific point.

Our judgment is that it should certainly be set at the same level initially, and the figure of £30 million is the amount that it would raise on that basis. Those issues need to be discussed in more detail, but we want to set the levy at the same level initially.

I will bring in Stephen Lea-Ross on that. It is really difficult to say. I cannot tell you what the global cost will be of remediating all the buildings, because we just do not know the extent. A partial remediation of a building could cost £300,000 and a full remediation could be upwards of £800,000, which is at least a £500,000 difference. We just do not know at the moment. Indeed, some buildings might require no remediation. As things stand, until the actual technical assessment is done, it is really difficult to assess that.

I have told the sector that I understand the point about certainty. I would not want a situation in which the rate of the levy constantly changes. We are working with the sector to try to have a period of stability, and we have set out the amount that we expect to receive from the levy. We can factor that in and maybe have some points of review, where we take stock of the actual SBA remediation costs annually and where the levy sits in relation to that. As you can imagine, I want to give the sector a bit of certainty in the initial phase.

It is a very complex system, as it is in England and Wales.

The issues are exactly the same, and the timeframe will be exactly the same, in England and Wales. It will be a 10-year programme. For complex buildings, it will take some time for the work to be completed; for others, it will not. For home owners who have faced a level of uncertainty, it is important that, through the SBA process, we are able to, I hope, give the green light and a clean bill of health to a lot of buildings, or say that only marginal remediation is required, so that people can get on with selling properties that are mortgageable again. Exactly the same issues are being faced in England, Wales and elsewhere.

That is an interesting question. It depends on how far the chancellor goes—is she talking about just financial assets or assets per se? I suspect that she will restrict herself to financial assets, such as those relating to the student loan book and so on. I would favour the rules being tweaked to enable us to have the maximum benefit and flexibility, with at least the cut to capital funding being reversed, but we want significant investment beyond that so that we have a line of sight to be able to invest in affordable housing and so on.

That is very topical, given that the UK budget is coming tomorrow. I hope that we get an improvement in the capital position, as has been alluded to. If that is to be believed, I would certainly welcome that, because it would help us with certainty and with being able to invest what we need to invest.

The other important issue is multiyear settlements. The indication is that the spending review for both resource and capital will conclude in the spring. That will give the Scottish Government a multiyear line of sight on capital expenditure, which will be helpful in the building safety space, as it will enable us to plan what we think will be a reasonable allocation to ensure that the pace can be kept up. The last thing that we want is to have the single building assessments completed but for people to then be waiting for the remediation work. We do not want any delay to that. Once the SBAs are completed, we want the remediation work to be got on with as quickly as possible. We absolutely appreciate that people want to be able to move on with their lives. At the centre of this are worried householders who have been waiting a long time, so we want to be able to get on with this.

There is not a formula. As I mentioned, the estimate is that the levy will bring in £30 million a year. My gut tells me that that will be nowhere near enough to remediate all the buildings to the level that will be required once the SBAs come in. We will have to keep it under review, but what the sector wants is certainty. Last week, it asked whether we would just keep changing the levy every couple of years.

That is correct, but all money that has been allocated to cladding—every penny of all consequentials—will be used for remediation. However, we can remediate only what we know needs to be remediated and in what way. The single building assessment will determine that. That is needed before money can be spent. The money will be spent but only after SBAs are carried out.