Seòmar agus comataidhean

Do the changes in approach to BBC commissioning for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland confirm that the BBC has not always played with a straight bat in this process and that the corporation has failed to act in accordance with the spirit of Ofcom’s rules?

Thank you.

I will ask you some questions about Scottish production at the moment. The change in approach to commissioning acknowledges that the BBC has underdelivered for Scotland over at least the last 10 years—people have that opinion. What resources are you offering for commissioning? Will the BBC now look at Scotland’s production companies, writers, directors and crews to ensure that the corporation’s obligation for Scottish production is and continues to be met?

It is good to note that you have that aspiration and that ambition.

Can I ask about the commissioners and how they are tasked with providing and selecting new projects for Scotland? How does that come about? Do they meet with drama, culture, comedy and entertainment? How do they select and choose the next opportunities?

You have talked about how you are changing some of the structures and adapting and you have said that you want to see different aspects coming into the sector and greater opportunities. How is that approach and the general fiscal arrangement managed to ensure that you capture the comedy, drama and entertainment for Scotland? How do you ensure that the production opportunities are grasped, kept here and managed effectively to enable Scotland to flourish? That is our ambition and it should be your ambition to achieve that for the corporation and to see where BBC Scotland can go in the future, even with the demands on financial resources and tasking to ensure that you can manage it.

I want to go back to a question that we have already touched on. Why should an appellant who receives planning permission on appeal pay for the appeal, given that they will already have paid the planning authority for the original application, which might have been rejected because the authority imposed unreasonable conditions on the awarding of planning permission? The appellant will already have stumped up money, so why should they contribute more to the process?

Do you think that the fees will cover the running of the process?

Do we have a rough idea of the numbers of students who are having that difficulty? You spoke about foreign students, but you also indicated that some UK students might have a similar issue. Do you have any statistics on the size or depth of the problem?

We have discussed the difficulties with security that aid agencies and staff on the ground have to face. How do we make progress on that? You have said that international organisations require to have pressure put on them but, for the people on the ground who are living with and dealing with the situation daily, what hope and what support can you give them in relation to how they can manage the situation?

I thank the witnesses for their frank and full updates so far. Many of our questions have already been answered. What I am hearing from you and from others is that the horrific and harrowing situation is now at a tipping point. The UN humanitarian office has said that partners are warning that, without immediate fuel deliveries, a full shutdown of water and sanitation will possibly happen by the end of this week. That takes us to a different level.

You have talked about the number of trucks that have been going in. I believe that about 80 trucks went in on Monday and Tuesday of this week. You have touched on the potential for malnutrition as a result of that reduced supply of food and the difficulties with medication, and there is now the potential issue with the supply of water and sanitation. Where do you see the situation going, given the stark warning that we have had from the UN about what could happen this week?

Maybe Saleh Saeed wants to answer that.

Amendment 218 is consequential to amendment 219. Amendment 219 introduces flexibility to adjust rent mid-tenancy in response to significant changes in circumstances. That is particularly relevant in cases in which an employee leaves their job but remains within the property as the tenant or when a successor takes over the tenancy after a death, moving to a market rent from a nominal rent that is linked to employment.

When rent needs to be raised because of circumstances that are considered by ministers to be an emergency, amendment 219 would enable that to be done in an incremental manner, removing the limit on the number of times that rent can be increased.

Amendment 220 is consequential to amendment 214, which was debated previously. It amends proposed new section 43J of the Private Housing (Tenancies) (Scotland) Act 2016 to the same effect, but for tenancies that are situated in a rent control area.

In relation to amendments 138, 161, 162, 201, 202, 294 and 495, rent increase appeal processes must be fair, proportionate, time limited and bound to ensure timely resolutions that provide certainty for landlords and tenants. An open-ended system with no cost to tenants might inadvertently encourage speculative appeals, and that would put strain on adjudication bodies.

On amendments 139 and 140, rent setting is inherently subjective and it reflects the market and what tenants are willing to pay. Therefore, rent officers or tribunals should not be allowed to vary rent determination.

On amendments 496 and 499, the repairing standard clearly establishes that, under the enforcement baseline for property conditions, it is a criminal offence to let a property that fails to meet the standards. The amendments are not only unnecessary but would introduce subjectivity to a well-defined framework.

On amendments 238 and 240, the existing costs of dealing with appeals are already seen as a deterrent against misuse by landlords. Penalties will only have a negative impact on the supply of small landlords by discouraging them from the sector.

I move amendment 218.