Seòmar agus comataidhean

Well, it really is not. Given the recent performance of Ferguson’s, it does not take a genius or a shipbuilding expert to figure that one out, does it?

What figure would require ministerial direction?

What would you have to spend to get that due diligence done?

This is just the latest increase. Is there a top line above which you will not go to finish off the vessel?

Okay. I will ask about the yard in general, then. We know that there is no confirmed work beyond the Glen Rosa—or, at least, none that I am aware of. I might be wrong—do you have other information? If not, it seems that once the Glen Rosa is finished, that is it—there is no more work.

Yes, I do, and I would be interested to hear what those other hazards are—I do not know, but they will be listed somewhere. My focus is on the damp and mould issues, which, as I said, the committee looked at on 18 March. We heard then from Sean Clerkin from the Scottish Tenants Organisation, who called for “proper statutory intervention” that would require accurate information about housing stock, annual inspections and training, so that all employees of private and social landlords can identify damp and mould. He said:

“For too long, the housing sector has lacked the knowledge and has been totally inadequate in dealing effectively with damp and mould.”—[Official Report, Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee, 18 March 2025; c 9.]

That was a good point. Statutory intervention is required to help to protect tenants against the problems of damp and mould.

I think that it was you, convener, who said earlier that most of us will have had to deal with such problems at some point in our parliamentary careers, or if we have been councillors, as I was previously. When you said that, I reflected on an experience early in my time as an MSP when I had to deal with a case in Motherwell and saw the worst conditions that I have ever seen, in a block of flats that was riddled with damp and mould. The walls were absolutely black, but nothing was being done and those flats were not fit for habitation, but people were living there. The law was not adequate then and it is not adequate now, so we must do something about it, because people should not be living in those conditions in modern Scotland.

I have heard that very clearly. I will say that the tone of the cabinet secretary is slightly more positive than what we have heard before, even during the process of this bill. She is offering to work with people. Members might want to consider cancelling any plans that they have for the summer. The cabinet secretary has offered to have a good number of discussions, so we might want to check our calendars—and check with our other halves to see whether that is appropriate—because we will be extremely busy.

That goes back to something that I predicted last week, which I suspect is about to come true: that stage 3 will be after the summer. Given what has been said, I think that it will have to be, because a number of discussions must be held. Maggie Chapman made the very good point that we ought to work together ahead of stage 3, as I think we will have to do on the various student issues that have been raised previously, so that we get this right.

I will come to my amendments in the group, but my reflection on pretty much all the amendments in it is that the intent behind them is well meaning. People want the quality of accommodation to be driven up, particularly in the rented sector. The cabinet secretary has repeatedly said that the laws are in place and we already have the powers. However, she accepts that something is failing or is not working. During the process of this bill, we need to work to achieve a system that actually works. We need to all pull together on that, and we really have a lot of work to do.

My amendments in the group deal with Awaab’s law, which the committee has already looked at—Ms Gallacher could not make it that week, and I was lucky enough to stand in on her behalf in that session. I remind people that Awaab Ishaq died in Rochdale in 2020 and that that highlighted the issue of damp and mould in houses. The death of a child brought that issue to the fore. There is legislation in England but not yet here, and we need to get that right. We are here to protect people—that is what this is about. We need to drive up standards.

I am not planning to move amendment 444, given the cabinet secretary’s positive comments about working ahead of stage 3. Emma Roddick will have heard what I think should happen—which is that a group of MSPs should get together to explore those issues. Would she be interested in taking part in that?

Very good.

Yes, I do, and I would be interested to hear what those other hazards are—I do not know, but they will be listed somewhere. My focus is on the damp and mould issues, which, as I said, the committee looked at on 18 March. We heard then from Sean Clerkin from the Scottish Tenants Organisation, who called for “proper statutory intervention” that would require accurate information about housing stock, annual inspections and training, so that all employees of private and social landlords can identify damp and mould. He said:

“For too long, the housing sector has lacked the knowledge and has been totally inadequate in dealing effectively with damp and mould.”—[Official Report, Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee, 18 March 2025; c 9.]

That was a good point. Statutory intervention is required to help to protect tenants against the problems of damp and mould.

I think that it was you, convener, who said earlier that most of us will have had to deal with such problems at some point in our parliamentary careers, or if we have been councillors, as I was previously. When you said that, I reflected on an experience early in my time as an MSP when I had to deal with a case in Motherwell and saw the worst conditions that I have ever seen, in a block of flats that was riddled with damp and mould. The walls were absolutely black, but nothing was being done and those flats were not fit for habitation, but people were living there. The law was not adequate then and it is not adequate now, so we must do something about it, because people should not be living in those conditions in modern Scotland.