Meeting of the Parliament (Hybrid)

Meeting date: Wednesday, February 2, 2022

Official Report 1019KB pdf

---

Prevention of Homelessness Duties

The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-03018, in the name of Shona Robison, on prevention of homelessness duties.

14:55  

The Parliament should be proud of the progressive housing rights that it has introduced for people who experience, or are at risk of experiencing, homelessness. That has been the result of a concerted effort across the chamber. The right to access to permanent accommodation and other rights that the Parliament has already enshrined in Scots law are some of the strongest in the world.

“The Homelessness Monitor: Scotland 2021”, which was commissioned by Crisis, found that rates of the most severe forms of homelessness are substantially lower in Scotland than they are in England and Wales. However, to reach our ambition of ensuring that everyone has a safe and warm place to call home, we want to end rough sleeping and to transform temporary accommodation, so there is more to be done.

Yesterday, we published our latest homelessness statistics. Although in 24 local authority areas use of temporary accommodation has gone down since September 2020, the statistics show that, overall, far too many households are in temporary accommodation. That is not good enough. We must learn from the areas that are making progress and share their good practice. We will continue to work with our partners to use all the powers that we have and to take the action that is needed to reduce the time that people spend in temporary accommodation, to improve the quality of accommodation that is available and to tackle rough sleeping. We must also do more to prevent people from entering the homelessness system in the first place.

I am puzzled as to how the minister can claim that we have world-leading legislation on homelessness when tens of thousands of people in Scotland do not have a home.

Our world-leading homelessness legislation has been recognised by many organisations. However, what matters is that we ensure that it is used, that the policy is implemented and that we are able to eradicate homelessness entirely. That will take time; this debate is the next stage of that process.

In 2018, the experts on our homelessness and rough sleeping action group presented us with solutions and we adopted their recommendations in full. Our ending homelessness together action plan, which was based on those recommendations, was refreshed in 2020-21. Stakeholders have universally welcomed the plan, which includes a shift towards rapid rehousing, a reduction in use of temporary accommodation and new homelessness prevention duties. It is the right plan. Those are mutually reinforcing activities: making progress in homelessness prevention improves our chances of progress in the other areas.

Our plans are backed by investment of £100 million pounds from 2018-19 to 2025-26. It is now time to take the next steps on the journey towards ending homelessness through our commitment to introducing new legal duties to prevent homelessness.

Concerns have been expressed about the proposal to remove the right to permanent accommodation and replace it with a right to stable accommodation. All of us would be concerned if that were to be a dilution of Scotland’s statutory housing rights. Will the cabinet secretary confirm that that will not happen, and will she ensure that hard-won housing rights are protected?

The consultation on the matter runs until the end of March. We want to ensure that we get it right, and we want to prevent more homelessness at an earlier stage, so that people do not have to face the trauma and disruption that it brings to their lives. The proposals will strengthen the range of homelessness rights and will not change any existing rights to housing. The proposal on suitable and stable housing is about widening the range of housing options that are available to people who are at risk of homelessness.

I am happy to write to Miles Briggs with more detail about that, but the consultation is open. We are having the consultation to ensure that we get it right.

The prevention review group that we established in late 2019 provided a thoughtful set of recommendations last year. The full package of recommendations informed the proposals in the joint Scottish Government and Convention of Scottish Local Authorities consultation that was published in December.

Strengthening existing powers and changing the way that we work in order to prevent homelessness before it occurs are key to addressing the challenges in the future and will make us a leader in the United Kingdom in homelessness prevention duties. The right to permanent accommodation for people who are homeless in Scotland provides the strong foundation on which we can build. Our commitment is not to change established rights but to provide legislative change that helps to create a society in which fewer people become homeless in the first place.

We propose introducing new duties on public bodies to “ask and act” to prevent homelessness, so that prevention of homelessness is no longer the sole responsibility of local authority housing departments. We know, for example, that there is often increased engagement with health services before a person becomes homeless. We must get better at identifying such crisis points to ensure that every single risk of homelessness that can be prevented is prevented. That reflects the move to a “no wrong door” approach, so that the risk of homelessness is acted on regardless of the service that is first approached.

There are also new duties proposed for landlords, including in relation to domestic abuse, which continues to be the main reason for homelessness among women.

The proposals do not stop there. They also aim to make changes to existing homelessness legislation to ensure that local authority housing departments are able to act sooner—up to six months before homelessness might occur.

Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?

Yes—a brief one.

The cabinet secretary talks about the key role that local authorities will play, but how will they do that when their budgets are being cut yet again this year?

Local authority budgets have been set out in the draft budget, including the addition of £120 million. If Jeremy Balfour thinks that more money needs to be allocated to local authorities, his party should come forward and tell us where that money should come from. I look forward to hearing those constructive proposals.

We know that finding and keeping accommodation after a period spent in an institution can be difficult. We propose that action be taken much earlier, so that people are not faced with homelessness when they leave hospital or prison. This is bold new territory for homelessness legislation in Scotland, and is the right thing to do for individuals, families and communities, in order to prevent the trauma and disruption to lives that is caused by homelessness.

Our proposals are informed by three principles: that there should be a shared public responsibility to prevent homelessness; that there should be earlier intervention across the whole system to prevent homelessness; and that we must allow greater choice and control for those who are at risk of homelessness. That last point about choice was emphasised by people with lived experience of homelessness, who helped to inform the proposals; we will continue that vital engagement with people who have experienced homelessness.

The proposals aim to drive a whole-system change. We will need legislation and other policy changes if we are to meet our ambitions. There have been good examples of partnership working to prevent homelessness through the adoption of a more person-centred housing options approach to prevention in recent years and, more recently, through joint working between homelessness and other services in response to the pandemic.

An array of important prevention activity has been, and continues to be, implemented through the hard work of local authorities, landlords and other organisations. The consultation proposals seek to improve practice around joint working on prevention in order to ensure consistency of delivery while recognising local circumstances and decision making.

Effective prevention means helping people who are at risk of homelessness before they reach crisis point. It also means considering people’s circumstances in the widest sense, including their mental wellbeing, physical health and other needs. The proposed prevention duties are far reaching and include proposals to address the issues that are faced by those who experience more complex needs, including addiction. That includes new approaches to case co-ordination for people with more complex needs who experience homelessness, and an increased role for health services in provision of supported accommodation.

Improving outcomes for those who have the most complex needs will remain central to our drive to end homelessness. The housing first approach is an important part of our rapid rehousing approach, and offers settled accommodation and wraparound support to people with multiple and complex needs. It was good to see in the homelessness statistics the rise in the number of people getting settled accommodation. Our housing first pathfinder programme, which is the largest of its kind in the UK, has created more than 540 tenancies since 2019, and 84 per cent of those have been sustained.

Understandably, much of our focus in recent years has been on addressing rough sleeping, which is the most extreme form of homelessness. We have concentrated on reducing the use of, and time spent in, temporary accommodation through the adoption of the rapid rehousing approach. Of course, that was thrown into sharper focus by the pandemic; having a robust homelessness strategy meant that we were able to respond quickly to put measures in place to protect people at risk. All 32 councils have been implementing their rapid rehousing transition plans for the past three years. We have recently committed an extra £16 million of funding to councils over the next two years, thereby bringing the total investment in rapid rehousing and housing first to £53.5 million.

The ending homelessness together action plan and the proposed homelessness prevention duties are part of the wider picture, as outlined in “Housing to 2040”. We are consulting until the end of March. Consultation views will inform our final proposals, and our intention is to introduce legislative requirements on prevention of homelessness in the proposed housing bill, which will also cover proposals for our new deal for tenants.

I look forward to hearing what members have to say about the proposals.

I move,

That the Parliament welcomes the publication of the joint Scottish Government and COSLA consultation on Prevention of Homelessness duties, which seeks views on ambitious plans to strengthen the rights of people experiencing, or at risk of experiencing, homelessness in Scotland; supports the principles as informed by the final report of the Prevention Review Group, which include a shared public responsibility to prevent homelessness; notes that the package of measures in the consultation includes the introduction of new legal duties on public bodies and landlords to “ask and act” on any risk of homelessness, changes to existing homelessness legislation to prioritise early intervention, and maximising the housing options available to people; recognises that approaches to preventing homelessness should be person centred and trauma informed, and agrees that this approach will support the implementation of the human right of an adequate home for all.

I call Miles Briggs to speak to and move amendment S6M-03018.2. You have up to seven minutes, Mr Briggs.

15:05  

I thank the organisations and charities that have provided helpful briefings ahead of the debate, including Shelter Scotland and Crisis. Both charities have been incredibly helpful in briefing me on homelessness prevention and highlighting what needs to be done to end homelessness and rough sleeping in Scotland. I pay tribute to them and to all those who are working across Scotland to tackle homelessness and rough sleeping.

All parties in Scotland are committed to ending homelessness and rough sleeping by the end of this parliamentary session. Disappointingly, there has been limited progress on reaching that goal, especially here in the capital, with concerning figures being published today.

If we are serious about ending homelessness, we need to see people in sustainable accommodation now, not just good intentions about the progress to be made in the future. No one doubts that ending homelessness is not a straightforward task. Ultimately, we need to have enough homes for everyone in Scotland.

Having sustainable, suitable accommodation that meets the needs of the people and families living in it is vital to ensure that accommodation becomes a stable home. Making sure that local authorities keep people in mind when they plan homes and communities and make decisions about the location and locality of the services available is also very important.

As well as getting people who are currently homeless rehomed, preventing people from becoming homeless in the first place is hugely important. That is why I welcome the publication of the joint Scottish Government and COSLA consultation on the homelessness prevention duties and the work that the prevention review group has undertaken to date.

The plans that have been outlined to strengthen the rights of people who are experiencing or who are at risk of experiencing homelessness in Scotland present a welcome step forward. I have long supported the development of a preventative system; indeed, I welcome the package of measures that is outlined in the consultation, including the introduction of new legal duties on public bodies and landlords to ask and act in relation to any risk of homelessness.

A major flaw in the current system is that people must register as homeless before they are given any housing support or access to services. The current model prevents people from presenting or asking for help at an early stage; often, they are at a crisis point, which is completely counterintuitive to what we are all trying to achieve.

If we want to prevent people from becoming homeless, we must give them the necessary support to stay in their accommodation, as the cabinet secretary mentioned, at least six months ahead of them potentially becoming homeless. Local authorities are still not required to provide housing support before someone becomes homeless. As I have said, that must change if we are going to be more effective at preventing homelessness in all our communities.

Policies such as rapid rehousing are very welcome, but keeping someone in their home is often more important, especially when children are involved. Legislation takes time to put in place and often even longer to implement on the ground in council areas. That is why I hope that the homelessness prevention duties will be given the priority and resources that they require.

The duties will require proper funding—for example, in Edinburgh, we see pressures on local budgets, especially in light of the additional challenges that the capital faces in preventing homelessness. I welcome the conversations that I have had with the cabinet secretary on the issue and I welcome her commitment to take forward cross-party talks with regard to the situation in Edinburgh.

I remind Miles Briggs that we have doubled our ending homelessness together fund from £50 million to £100 million, but we recognise that some local authorities have particular issues around homelessness—relating to refugees and asylum seekers, for example, in Edinburgh—so I am happy to continue those discussions about local needs.

I look forward to that.

During the pandemic, we saw significant reductions in the levels of homelessness across Scotland and in the capital. I hope that the legislation will continue to enable public bodies to focus their resources and respond in a way that is similar to the response that we saw to the public health emergency during the pandemic. A multisector response to the pandemic facilitated much of that welcome work and should be promoted and expected, as I hope that it will be.

As I said, ending homelessness is not a straightforward task. Having enough homes for everyone is essential, but that is not enough in itself. When someone becomes homeless, it is often due to an obstacle in their life that they have found hard to overcome. That can range from experiences as a result of trauma, addiction, substance misuse, mental health problems or relationship breakdown, for example. Models such as housing first and more assisted living can and should be part of that template for rehousing and supporting people to overcome their personal challenges.

That is why the Scottish Conservatives have called for the roll-out of housing first to be accelerated across all Scotland’s local authorities. The cuts that councils face from ministers in the coming budget are a major concern. I hope that leaders across local authorities will not make savings, which they could look to make, from homelessness services or the third sector organisations that support people.

Access to health services and social care is another critically important issue. The homelessness death rate in Scotland is currently double that of England and Wales. There were an estimated 256 deaths of people experiencing homelessness in Scotland in 2020. People who are homeless are three to six times more likely to die prematurely, which is unacceptable and must be addressed. All of us in the Parliament must work to address that.

Research by the Health and Social Care Alliance Scotland suggests that people who are experiencing homelessness continue to face stigma and additional barriers to accessing health and addiction services. That is why I also believe that we need a review of access to homeless health and social care services, and I ask Parliament to support that by agreeing to my amendment to the motion.

Ending homelessness and rough sleeping in Scotland at the earliest opportunity, and by the end of this parliamentary session, is an admirable goal, but we all need to work to ensure that the action that we want to see becomes a reality.

I move amendment S6M-03018.2, to insert at end:

“; is committed and united in the shared public responsibility to eradicate rough sleeping in Scotland at the earliest opportunity or by 2026; notes that surveys have suggested that over 5,000 people in Scotland have reported sleeping rough at least once per year, with the homelessness death rate in Scotland being double that of England and Wales, with an estimated 256 deaths of people experiencing homelessness in Scotland in 2020; further notes with concern the number of children living in temporary accommodation in Scotland, which has reached its highest levels since records began, along with the number of councils reporting the breaching of unsuitable accommodation orders; notes that research has demonstrated the link between increased interactions with health and social care services and the risk of people becoming homeless; calls on the Scottish Government to help support people into safe and stable housing as quickly as possible with an acceleration in the roll-out of Housing First across all Scottish local authorities; notes the research by the Health and Social Care Alliance that suggests that people experiencing homelessness continue to face stigma and additional barriers to accessing health and addiction services, and calls on ministers to support a review of access to homeless health and care services.”

15:12  

I draw members’ attention to my entry in the register of members’ interests, which shows that I am the owner of a rental property in North Lanarkshire.

We welcome the debate and are pleased to see that the consultation is under way. We support measures to intervene at an earlier stage, and encourage services to work together to respond to people’s needs to ensure that fewer people and families face having to rebuild their lives.

Yesterday’s homelessness statistics for the six months to September demonstrate that the nation’s continuing homelessness crisis is severe and persistent. Each case represents a household of real people, including whole families, children and people with mental health or other problems. They simply want the right to safe, secure, affordable housing, but, instead, they are going without.

As our amendment says, one in 12 people have been

“forced to experience the trauma of homelessness”,

which shows that the opportunity to go much further to end homelessness, and prevent it from happening in the first place, cannot be missed. In May, we pledged that there should be collective responsibility across public services to prevent homelessness. When it comes before Parliament, we will therefore support legislation that applies such a duty to public services.

Similar to the issue that was highlighted by Miles Briggs, Shelter has drawn to my attention the proposal that would remove the right to permanent accommodation and replace it with the right to stable accommodation. I ask the cabinet secretary to reflect on that and confirm that there will be no regression of hard-won housing and homelessness rights in forthcoming legislation. I ask the Government and Parliament to reaffirm existing expectations that homelessness ends only in a secure, permanent setting.

I will reiterate what I said to Miles Briggs: the proposals will strengthen the range of homelessness rights, and they do not change any existing rights to housing. It is about strengthening, not weakening.

It is good to have that reassurance, and I am sure that Shelter will be reassured, too. I look forward to debating the detail of the proposed legislation when it is introduced.

In its briefing, Crisis points out that we need to be diligent with the legislation, ensure that it is rights based and that prevention is not perceived as gatekeeping by clarifying the place of homelessness prevention in the current system.

The motion calls for a person-centred approach. Crisis offers the detail of what that would mean: asking people about their situation, their housing needs and the outcomes that they want, so that a personalised housing plan for what will happen next can be agreed. I think that the Government is unsure of the benefits in providing effective rights to review and challenge decisions, but such rights would aid the desire for the system to be person centred.

We also believe that the rhetoric around preventing homelessness must be matched by the provision of resources to local authorities. With councils now being forced to consider further cuts of £250 million, it would be remiss of us to ignore the impact on ending homelessness. Preventing homelessness and ensuring that rapid rehousing transition plans are a success becomes more difficult in the context of housing policy funding being part of the Government’s general revenue gap in relation to local authorities and its having cut council budgets by almost £1 billion since 2013-14. We know that prevention will undoubtedly save money in the long run, but we cannot afford to starve homelessness services of the funds that they desperately need to do that prevention work.

The Crisis homelessness monitor found that the

“primary barrier seen to risk inhibiting future progress”

on the vision in the “Ending Homelessness Together: High Level Action Plan”

“relates to resources.”

It cites that stakeholders were, in general, positive about RRTPs and that they are part of “a radical transformative agenda”, but that

“there was a common view that RRTPs were underresourced”.

A report from the Salvation Army found that overall funding for homelessness and housing support services fell by 18 per cent from 2013-14 to 2019-20. It asks whether there is

“the necessary investment to achieve this transformational change”

that we want to see.

The Salvation Army also found significant differences between the amounts requested and received in RRTPs. The amounts were substantial—almost all local authorities received less than they had requested. One local authority received 2.5 per cent of what it had requested.

Please conclude.

If we are to truly end homelessness and prevent it in the future, we need to make sure that our public services are funded to deliver on their new duties.

I move amendment S6M-03018.1, to insert at end:

“; notes that homelessness in Scotland is rising again, that in 2020-21 over half of the approaches to Housing Options Scotland resulted in a homelessness application, and that 14,161 households were assessed as homeless in the six months to September 2021; believes that the nation’s homelessness crisis is severe and persistent, with one in 12 people in Scotland being forced to experience the trauma of homelessness; notes the findings of the report, Homelessness in Scotland, prepared by The Salvation Army, which found that the overall level of funding for homelessness and housing support services had decreased by 18% between 2013-14 and 2019-20 and asked if ‘the necessary investment to achieve this transformational change’ was being delivered, and the Crisis publication, Homelessness Monitor: Scotland 2021, which found that ‘the primary barrier seen to risk inhibiting future progress on the [Ending Homelessness Together] Action Plan’s vision relates to resources’, and calls on the Scottish Government to ensure that funding to Scottish local authorities is adequate to ensure that the implementation of the prevention of homelessness objectives and other landmark projects, like Housing First, are not at risk.”

15:17  

Every 19 minutes, a household becomes homeless. By the time that this debate ends, another four households could be homeless. Last year, 27,000 people were classed as homeless. In addition, 13,000 householders are stuck in temporary accommodation, including—this is shameful—7,500 children.

That is despite the repeated promises of the Scottish National Party, which has been in power for the past 15 years, of action on homelessness. In 2007, the Scottish Government promised to tackle homelessness. In 2012, it passed legislation to end homelessness within months. The Deputy First Minister at the time, Nicola Sturgeon, said that the legislation was Europe’s most progressive homelessness legislation. It would have been progressive if it had actually ended homelessness; it did not, yet the Government persisted in calling it an “historic homelessness commitment” and then a “world-leading homelessness target”.

Homelessness continued at embarrassingly high levels. In 2018, the Government moved to an action plan; that became the “Ending Homelessness Together” action plan in 2019, an end to “ghettoisation” in 2020 and “a continuing national priority” in 2021. As is always the case with this Government, the words are grander than the action. Therefore, members will forgive me for being a little bit sceptical on the latest commitment to a new prevention of homelessness duty. Apparently, the plans are “ambitious” and include new “legal duties” and a

“human right of an adequate home for all”.

Of course everyone is going to support the bulk of those proposals—who would not?—but it is action that counts.

With regard to Shelter’s concerns, I am puzzled as to why, if there is no difference between “permanent” and “stable”, the word cannot just be changed back to “permanent”. That would assure Shelter that there is no dilution of statutory rights in Scotland. If there really is no difference, let us stick with the wording that we are used to.

It is right to pursue early intervention and a person-centred approach, but for the thousands of people who are classed as homeless or living in temporary accommodation, those are just words, to be frank. What counts is action.

The work that was done at the outset of the pandemic shows what could have been done if we had set our minds to it. We got lots and lots of people off the streets. It was immediate action—the money was found and the difference was made. However, the reality is that, for years before that, funding had been cut—by 18 per cent, according to the Salvation Army.

Jeremy Balfour is absolutely right about this year’s council budgets. Supposedly, there is an extra £120 million; in reality, hundreds of millions of pounds have been cut. Most embarrassingly, the cabinet secretary does not seem to be bothered enough to make the case to the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Economy for an increase in that funding. She is asking other people to do her job for her.

We have heard about the 256 people who died while experiencing homelessness in 2020. That is one of the highest figures in western Europe and an increase of 40 deaths compared with the previous year. Failed policies on drugs, mental health and housing, with long waits and inadequate services, have produced that figure. If people are living on the streets, sofa surfing or shuttling between temporary accommodation, that takes a huge toll on their mental and physical health and on children’s education and development. It stops people getting on in life. I live in hope—

Please conclude, Mr Rennie.

—that this will be a change and we will end homelessness in Scotland. I live in hope, because we need desperate action.

Elena Whitham is the first speaker in the open debate.

15:22  

I refer members to my entry in the register of interests, which shows that I am still a serving councillor in East Ayrshire Council. It is also important to advise the chamber at the outset that I was a member of the prevention review group that was convened by Crisis on behalf of the Scottish Government to explore homelessness prevention duties, I was a co-signatory to the ending homelessness together joint action plan, and I have been homeless twice.

I worked for many years in homelessness services, supporting individuals to access, navigate and come out the other end of what was often referred to as the sausage factory. I realised very early on that services were not talking to each other, as siloed approaches had built huge walls, which meant that individuals were often being failed at every turn.

Back in 2002, I tried in vain to argue that adverse childhood experiences, trauma, abuse, addiction, mental health issues, experiences of being in care and underlying and crushing poverty were all drivers of the high levels of homelessness that we were seeing. They were exacerbated by an ever-increasing drop in the number of socially rented houses and by the severity of the priority need category. Some days, it felt like I was going into battle—another day, another 22-year-old man self-medicating with street drugs. He would be care experienced and have multiple ACEs and severe and enduring mental health issues, and I would be advised to take a set of keys from the low-demand pile of long-term, shuttered void properties, as that was the best that he could hope for. As I tried to pick the least-worst option, I knew that this would be yet another tenancy that, no matter how hard he or I tried, would not be sustained.

I heralded the abolition of priority need, as that direction of travel meant that Scotland—despite what Willie Rennie may say—now has some of the world’s strongest homelessness legislation, in terms of giving individuals great legal protections when they are facing imminent homelessness. However, I knew that we needed to increase our housing stock and do much more work to prevent homelessness from happening in the first place.

The housing options approach that was adopted at that time meant that councils were already looking at ways to prevent homelessness by supporting individuals and families early on. However, we in councils were accused of gatekeeping—of preventing individuals from accessing their rights, as no homeless presentation was taken—rather than seen as doing the preventative work that was so desperately needed. For example, women fleeing domestic abuse should not be required to enter the homelessness system; managed moves or support to remain in their homes safely are the ideal solutions.

The ending homelessness together joint action plan is clear that we need to work upstream to prevent people from entering the homelessness system in the first place. The proposals that are being consulted on will do that by requiring public bodies to ask and to act regarding a person’s homelessness situation.

A big part of that needs to be about a sense of real choice and control. I knew that housing someone in an area that they did not know and that was far from their supports would increase the likelihood that the tenancy would not be sustained in the long term. Therefore, in the last part of my speech, I will focus on the prevention review group’s recommendation on maximal housing options.

Offering a range of housing options to those who are at risk of or experiencing homelessness gives them choice, control and flexibility in their housing journey. It gives them the same experience as other members of the community, but with additional protections to prevent the future risk of homelessness by ensuring that the chosen option is a suitable and settled one, even if it is in the private rented sector or, more unusually by Scottish norms, shared housing.

The proposed change to the law would not necessarily mean that there would be fewer allocations of social housing to homeless households. Rather, it would mean that a household should not be required to journey through the homelessness system, with potentially long stays in temporary accommodation, as the primary route to accessing social housing.

Despite the sterling efforts of the Scottish Government, local authorities and registered social landlords with regard to the ambitious affordable housing supply programme, there are undeniable pressures on a finite stock of social housing. The PRG proposes a system whereby applicants who would prefer a different kind of housing option are allowed that possibility, which could in theory free up social housing stock. Reducing the numbers going through the system will also free up social housing that is currently used for temporary accommodation and allow it to be used for more settled housing.

Sadly, I supported and cajoled people into permanent social houses, as I believed that it was their best and only option, and I did not listen to them. They knew that a private let near their mum’s or a flat share with a friend suited them best. We must afford people a choice.

15:26  

Access to affordable, safe and stable housing must be a central part of any strategy to end homelessness. That is why the Scottish Conservatives believe that the housing first approach should be accelerated and rolled out across all local authorities. However, homelessness is not just about the availability of housing. Its causes, as the Centre for Social Justice argues, are a complex mix of personal and structural factors.

Just as barriers to affordable housing and stable employment are drivers of homelessness, so too are adverse childhood experiences, family breakdown, mental ill health and addiction. For example, we know from the most recent homelessness figures that household disputes, both violent and non-violent, accounted for more than a third of homelessness applications. Further, the prevention review group report highlights that almost a fifth of homeless applicants have had drug or alcohol-related issues.

That is why prevention and early intervention are so important, and why organisations such as Shelter Scotland and Crisis emphasise that homelessness prevention needs to become a priority focus for policy makers.

The United Kingdom and Welsh Governments have already put in place prevention duties. In England, that led to a 46 per cent drop in homelessness, and it led to a 59 per cent decrease over the first two years in Wales. Research from Crisis demonstrates that, during the same period, Scotland experienced a rise in the rate of homeless applications.

As Dr Beth Watts told the Social Justice and Social Security Committee in November last year, it is clear that the needs of those who are particularly susceptible to homelessness are much broader than the remit of local authority housing and homelessness departments. A whole-system, person-centred approach is therefore sensible. However, to be effective, it must be sufficiently resourced. Health and social care services, children’s services, police and prisons are already operating at capacity. For the proposed legislative changes to have the necessary impact, those who are charged with implementing them on the ground must be supported. I agree with the emphasis on

“a shared public responsibility to prevent homelessness”,

but I sincerely hope that that is not an abdication of the SNP-Green Government’s responsibility on the issue.

As an example, we can take Dundee, in my region, which is a city that the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Housing and Local Government knows very well. A 16-month investigation into mental health care in NHS Tayside heavily criticised the

“poor service, treatment, patient care and outcomes.”

Tragically, figures that were released in December show that the number of suspected drug deaths in Tayside remains at 2020 levels. Last year, although Scotland experienced a 9 per cent decrease in the number of homeless applications, Dundee City Council recorded a 9 per cent increase, while the housing first project has been cut to the bone.

Will Tess White give way on that point?

I am just about to say my final few words.

Dundee is grappling with a mental health crisis, a drugs crisis and a homelessness crisis, and the council is about to have a funding crisis. It is all very well putting statutory duties in place, but effective service delivery is key to addressing many of the problems that lead to homelessness. I hope that the SNP does not lose sight of that.

15:30  

Housing is important. Good-quality and affordable homes, as well as being good for health, support valuable local jobs. They are a good example of creating a wellbeing economy.

We all agree that the best way to end homelessness is to prevent it from happening in the first place. Scotland already has a strong framework of housing rights for those who are recognised as homeless or are threatened with homelessness. Under Scots law, a person should be treated as homeless even if they have accommodation, if it would not be reasonable for them to continue to stay in it.

If someone is legally homeless, they are entitled to stay in temporary accommodation while the local authority checks their eligibility for a permanent home. Local authorities have a pre-existing legal duty to help people who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless. That legal duty includes the need to provide information and advice on homelessness and its prevention, and to offer temporary or permanent accommodation.

The Housing (Scotland) Act 2001 established the right to review homelessness decisions and introduced the duty on registered social landlords to assist local authorities in rehousing homeless people. Anyone who finds themselves homeless through no fault of their own must be entitled to settled accommodation in a local authority or housing association tenancy, or in a private rental, not in bed and breakfasts or hotels for more than seven days.

The new proposals under the duties to prevent homelessness build on the strong housing rights that already exist in Scotland for people who become homeless.

Homelessness is often a traumatic and unsettling experience that can have a profound impact on the lives of those involved, including children. It is right that early action should be a shared public responsibility and that we give people who face homelessness more choice and control over where they live. A lack of choice can compound the distress that is already being felt by the person who is experiencing homelessness. I strongly agree that those who face homelessness should have an appropriate degree of choice in where they live and have access to the same accommodation options as other members of the public do. That point was made very well by my colleague Elena Whitham, who expanded on the benefits of getting it right the first time.

In relation to choice, it is only fair to acknowledge that, in my constituency, demand for social housing far outweighs availability. Thousands of people and families are on waiting lists, and they find their choices severely limited and the situation in which they find themselves limiting.

As we are discussing housing, I take the opportunity to mention, again, the importance of rent affordability. When wages are not going up, year-on-year rent increases are putting additional pressure on families at a time when household budgets are already stretched. Rent is the single largest cost for many families, so getting the affordability bit of affordable housing right is crucial and can make a real difference in preventing poverty and improving people’s lives.

Therefore, the investment that the Scottish Government is making in preventing homelessness and in building affordable homes is very welcome. By building more affordable homes, we provide warm and safe places for people to live. By intervening at an earlier stage and encouraging services to work together to respond to people’s needs, we can ensure that fewer people and families have to rebuild their lives and be affected by homelessness.

15:34  

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests, where I have registered that I own property for rent.

Tackling the homelessness crisis, which has been severe and persistent, must be an absolute priority in this parliamentary session. Homelessness is one of the biggest challenges that our country faces today, and we must tackle it with purpose to protect those who are at risk of experiencing homelessness in the future.

To give context to the seriousness of the situation that we face, I note that, as has been mentioned previously, Shelter Scotland’s reports highlight that, between April 2020 and March 2021, a household in Scotland became homeless every 19 minutes. In that same timeframe, 11,804 children were in households that were assessed as homeless, and more and more people are finding themselves with nowhere to stay as the numbers rise again today.

Those figures are devastating, and we must make policy interventions to address them. However, they cannot just be treated as numbers on a sheet. They represent a traumatic experience for individuals and families that has left them without a permanent home, and they must act as a prompt for MSPs across the chamber to seriously consider the issue of homelessness and what we can do to address it. The fact that around one in 12 Scots has experienced homelessness is disgraceful and is the result of a lack of serious action over many years.

However, not acting is no longer an option—we have no choice now but to be radical in our response, with transformative policies to eradicate homelessness. Policies that are linked to early intervention and prevention play a significant role in this.

As Scottish Labour fully supports early prevention methods to tackle homelessness, it welcomes the consultation as an initial step, albeit with questions over the delivery of its commitments and how they will be financed.

Transformative change is long overdue. We have known for long enough that homelessness is preventable; that cases in our recent history could have been avoided; that more families could have had better lives; and that more children could have had greater opportunities. We have to get this right for those reasons among so many more.

The consultation allows us to go further, to be bolder and to make the changes that we need to see. However, it is critical that the financial decision making of the Scottish Government does not put at risk the implementation of any of the prevention of homelessness objectives that are set out.

I must raise concerns at this stage. I hope that I can be forgiven for having little confidence in the Government’s ability to take appropriate preventative measures to reduce and eventually eradicate homelessness. Scotland’s councils have seen their budgets stretched to their very limits by the SNP Government. Cut after cut and year after year, the SNP has shown total disregard for local authorities that are desperate for investment to deliver more council housing and prevent homelessness.

Does the member agree that it might help the situation all around if local authorities could get their void properties up to scratch?

I hope that the Government can make huge commitments to local authorities, which desperately need it.

A clear difference exists between what the SNP promises to deliver and what it actually delivers. The Scottish Government must commit to ensuring that adequate and appropriate funding will be offered to our councils. That commitment cannot be more empty words from the SNP. The Government has to back up its words with actions and we will hold it to account in doing so.

Where there is the political will to address issues, steps can be taken to address them. However, investment, political will, support and resources are needed—all from the Government, which must support local authorities. The Scottish Government must match their words with actions. People need, expect, and deserve better, and the Scottish Government must act now to deliver.

15:38  

I refer members to my register of interests, as I am a serving councillor on East Lothian Council.

“Preventing homelessness: It’s everybody’s business” was the headline in the briefing that we received from Crisis in preparation for the debate. In its programme for government, the Scottish Government committed to strengthening existing homelessness prevention legislation and introducing a new duty on public bodies to ask people about their housing situation and take action if needed, thus supporting the development of the culture of early intervention. I welcome the publication of the consultation on the prevention of homelessness duties.

The plans to strengthen the rights of people who experience or are at risk of experiencing homelessness in Scotland are ambitious. We all have a responsibility to prevent homelessness, and it is right that the consultation introduces the new legal duties on public bodies—I will touch on that point and on its importance later—and on landlords. The new duties would prioritise early intervention and maximise the housing options that are available to people, using person-centred and trauma-informed approaches. In my 15 years as a councillor, I have seen many heartbreaking evictions of people, including of young families, people who fell ill and people who got into financial trouble after relationship breakdowns.

Why do we need the legislation? We have heard the figures already. One in 12 people have experienced homelessness. That is far too many. It is a very traumatic experience, as we have heard from Elena Whitham, who has had experience of it herself, and from constituents. By acting as quickly as we can and offering support, we can reduce the number of people who are pushed into homelessness.

Of course, ending homelessness does not mean that no one will ever lose their home again. It means that, through prevention, it will happen very rarely and, when it does, it is brief. Scotland can become a world leader in ending homelessness, but we need clarity in the legislation for those who are threatened with homelessness and on our current prevention measure duties.

Preventing homelessness would also reduce the use of temporary accommodation. In my local authority, there is a severe shortage of suitable temporary accommodation. It is also very expensive and an inefficient use of resources. People who live in temporary accommodation have usually arrived there because of a change in circumstances, such as a marriage breakdown, a bereavement, the loss of a job and so on. It is a very traumatic time.

Cuts to universal credit and increases in energy costs and national insurance will put people into poverty, which has a major impact in this area.

As we have heard, homelessness prevention needs to be embedded as a clear national and local priority. Formal and closer cross-agency coordination is key as we move forward. I recently met Women’s Aid East and Midlothian and we spoke about rehousing women who had to leave the marital home as a result of domestic abuse. There is lots of experience of that and we need to work more closely on that type of homelessness. I heard about a lack of dialogue on rehousing young adults who have stayed in care settings for longer than they needed to—two or three years longer, in some circumstances. We have heard about people who are recovering from addiction, and the intense level of support that they need. The housing first approach has helped. Local cross-agency coordination is key.

The Crisis cross-sector group that Elena Whitham mentioned recommended two main things. The first was to place duties on a range of public bodies based on the principles of asking people about their housing situation and, where necessary, acting upon that information. The second one—and this is the key part—is changing the current statutory homelessness framework so that local authorities must assist people who are at risk of homelessness, working in partnership with relevant partners such as health and social care and social landlords.

The existing housing options framework has to be put on a statutory basis. I have had too many cases and spoken to too many constituents who have been dealt with by different housing officers in different ways. We cannot have that continuing. Dealing with that would go some way towards addressing people’s risk of homelessness.

The proposals can bring many benefits. They would require more assistance to be provided to households that are facing major housing problems at an earlier stage, preventing them from reaching crisis point and giving them a stronger voice and more control during the process. They would also help to clarify the legal framework, join up services and provide more accountability. They would ensure that people can move as fast as possible into housing that meets their needs, makes the best use of the options that are available within the housing market and gives them the dignity of a roof over their heads.

15:42  

Twenty years ago, the Scottish homelessness task force called for more effective prevention of homelessness. It identified the need for more work on evictions and support for people leaving institutions such as the army, prison and hospital. We have known what is needed for a long time, but progress has been slower than we would like. I am proud that the Scottish Government and the Greens are consulting on new plans to make housing more affordable and secure through measures such as rent controls, a housing first approach and restricting evictions.

The new short-term licensing scheme and control area legislation will also give councils the power to take action locally. The joint Scottish Government and COSLA consultation presents a new set of legal duties as another tool for more homelessness prevention, and that is welcome, but changing the law is just a foundation for a wider change in culture, training and awareness, systems and processes, stronger leadership and adequate budgets.

The prevention review group report states:

“Responsibility to prevent homelessness should be a shared public responsibility”

and every part of the Government must consider how it can contribute to that. However, we need to consider capacity. Placing responsibilities on already overstretched local authorities and health boards might not result in the improvements that we need, especially if we do not simultaneously address the root causes of homelessness.

Global inequality is rising, with wealth increasingly concentrated at the top. New peer-reviewed research shows how income inequality drives hundreds of people into homelessness every night by pricing lower-income households out of housing markets. We also know that people who experience financial hardship and inequality are at increased risk of mental health challenges and that poor mental health is one of the biggest causes of homelessness.

We know, too, that the growing number of homes that are being used as short-term lets, combined with the high numbers of second homes and the use of flats and houses as investments, rather than homes, inflates house prices and rents to the point at which many people cannot afford to remain in their homes or neighbourhoods. That is a particular problem in rural and island areas, where temporary homeless accommodation is often far away from local support networks and registered services such as general practitioners.

We should support initiatives such as the smart clachan initiative in South Uist, which provides affordable and community-led housing, workspace, vegetable gardens and community support, and the project at the Achtercairn site at Gairloch, Wester Ross, which is a great example of a rural 20-minute neighbourhood. Such projects can counter homelessness and depopulation in rural areas.

However, we must also address the larger forces that I have outlined. We must consider more progressive taxation to tackle inequality. I look forward to the process of developing a fairer form of local taxation, including the work of the citizens assembly on council tax.

Finally, we must resist the clawback of devolved powers through the likes of the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 and the proposed Brexit freedoms bill. Scotland must be allowed to follow its own path and to prioritise tackling inequality, promoting fairness, dignity and respect, and ending homelessness.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. That was a very interesting contribution by Ms Burgess, but we were not able to intervene on her. Rather than having a debate, we listened to a speech. The chamber is not busy this afternoon. At what point will members be encouraged to give their speeches in the chamber, or a method of intervening be provided, so that we can intervene in constructive ways on members who participate remotely, in order that we can have a debate instead of just listening to speeches?

Mr Balfour will be aware that, at the moment, the facility exists for members to participate remotely, for reasons that he understands and that are related to public health issues. Work is under way to look at a system that will enable members who are participating in the chamber and members who are participating remotely to intervene. I have benefited from a pilot of that. However, that would obviously involve a procurement. A further update will be provided in due course.

15:47  

I will start by recognising the amazing work that was done by the homelessness and rough sleeping action group in getting us to where we are today. The focus on early intervention could save a lot of people a lot of pain, and I am proud to be a member of the committee that has been tasked with scrutinising the forthcoming legislation. That is proof that the Scottish Government is rightly considering homelessness as a social justice issue, not simply one of buildings.

For me, the key aspect of the cabinet secretary’s motion is its mention of a trauma-informed approach. Too often, people make assumptions that are based on one word: “homeless”. Employers will take one look at your care-of address and will chuck away your CV as quickly as I chuck away a Tory leaflet. Your pals start to judge you, and doctors do not want to prescribe you medication. However, not only do people often become homeless due to trauma, such as abuse, but the effect on your life of being without the security of a home cannot be overstated. I remember crying as I put clothes and belongings into bags to give away because I had nowhere to keep them. I remember leaving an appointment at a crisis centre and beginning the 10-minute walk to my friend’s house, where I would be staying that night, knowing that I would not be able to walk all the way. I made it just out of view of the centre and sank down by a fence. I was too sad to cry. I do not know how long I sat there, but the weight of feeling that I was a burden, that I had lost so much and that, essentially, I was too unwell to ever get myself out of that situation was literally weighing me down to the ground.

There is no question but that homelessness is a trauma. From the experience itself, which includes the constant worry, to the way that you are treated, even by those who are there to help, it is not something that you ever get over.

I ask those who try to gatekeep by deciding who is homeless and who is not based on whether they chose—I say “chose”; usually, they were forced to do it—to leave the place where they were living before, whether they are sleeping on the streets, a sofa or somewhere where they are just not safe, to please consider what I have said and stop diminishing such horrific experiences.

In its briefing prior to the debate, Shelter Scotland reminded MSPs that, in order for homelessness prevention efforts to succeed, there have to be enough homes for people to move into. In the Highlands and Islands, that is particularly critical. There might be wiggle room for people to move a few bus stops away in a bigger city, but a council house being available in Caithness will not help someone who has a job and a family in Skye.

When thousands upon thousands of buildings made to be homes are being bought up and used as anything but, communities are being destroyed—particularly in rural areas where the stock is low to start with. Within Highland Council, young people in Skye are most likely to present as homeless at home. That Skye also houses a large percentage of the Highlands’ Airbnbs is not a coincidence. The proliferation of short-term lets in fragile communities is forcing young people in my region into homelessness or out of the region.

I am glad that we are taking time to talk about a duty to prevent homelessness. I am also glad that Scotland is a world-leader in that policy area. However, every day, I see the damage that is being done to the Highlands and Islands and I know that we can and must do more, not only to build more homes, but to make sure that they stay as homes.

We need a rounded approach to tackling homelessness. With the new deal for tenants, duties to prevent homelessness and an ambitious house building programme, I believe that we are getting there. However, I hope to see stronger action on second and holiday homes alongside those policies in future. [Applause.]

I call Jeremy Balfour, to be followed by Jackie Dunbar.

15:51  

There is no need to clap before I start, but thank you.

I want to contribute in what I hope is a positive and constructive way. There is a lot of agreement with regard to what the Government is trying to do, and I think that there is cross-party support. As we have heard from a number of speakers, this is a massive issue here in Scotland. Every 19 minutes, a household becomes homeless. More than 11,000 children were assessed as homeless last year, which is equivalent to 32 children per day. In light of those figures, there is no doubt that homelessness is an issue that requires a swift and concerted effort to be tackled. The basic necessities that a home provides—such as shelter and security—are fundamental, and the only way that people can thrive and fully live their lives.

Our amendment sets out an ambitious target. Eradicating rough sleeping by 2026 is no easy task, but if we focus our efforts on tackling the root causes of homelessness and building robust systems to deal with cases quickly and efficiently, I believe that it can be met. However, there is a caveat to what I have said. That target can be met only if there is the appropriate funding for local authorities and the third sector. We can have the best legislation in the world and warm words in a chamber, but if you are a local authority in Scotland or a third sector charity working with people and you do not know where your money is coming from or whether your budget is being cut in real terms, you cannot provide those services. As I have said previously in the chamber, I used to work for a charity that helped people with homelessness. Each December, we were offered a letter of redundancy, because there was no guarantee that there would be funding for next year. That cannot go on.

Jeremy Balfour will be aware that, at the moment, we put about £80 million into discretionary housing budgets. More than £60 million of that is to mitigate the bedroom tax. Would he therefore agree that it would be better if the UK Government scrapped the bedroom tax, so that we could use that more than £60 million for other homelessness services? Would that be a good use of funding?

As the cabinet secretary likes to point out on a regular basis, we all make political choices. I have been elected to this Parliament to make political choices. If the Scottish Government would work with the powers that it has and use them more effectively, rather than keep sniping about Westminster Governments, homelessness would be much less of an issue.

It is clear that, when we talk about ending homelessness in Scotland, we should not talk of some kind of utopia when nobody will ever be in the position of losing their home. No Government can guarantee that—at least, not while the population maintains a degree of free choice. Rather, we are talking about creating a system in which no one is forced to sleep rough, because the system is ready and waiting to aid them in finding accommodation.

We found that system during the pandemic. Here in Edinburgh, rough sleeping was almost completely eroded during that time. Why? Funding was provided and local authorities, the Scottish Government and the third sector worked together. However, two years on, rough sleeping is happening again. That is a challenge for all of us, but for this Government in particular.

We want to work together. I want to work with anyone in the chamber who truly wants to eradicate this blight on Scottish society, but we cannot do that with warm words; we can do it only with action and money.

I call Jackie Dunbar, who will be the last member to speak in the open debate.

15:55  

I note my entry in the register of members’ interests, which says that I am still a serving councillor at Aberdeen City Council.

I am pleased to speak on the Scottish Government’s motion, and I welcome the publication of the joint Scottish Government and COSLA consultation on prevention of homelessness duties. In Scotland, we already have strong rights for those who find themselves in a homelessness situation, but it is important that we strengthen the legislation around early intervention, to give people facing homelessness more choice and more control over where they live. Early action should be a shared public responsibility, and we should be looking to act as early as possible to ensure that disruption to people’s lives is minimised. At the end of the day, everyone should have a home to call their own, no matter who they are, what they do for a living or what they earn. It is their right to have somewhere they call home.

We all have a duty, which is why I asked Carol Mochan whether she agreed about the void situation. Aberdeen City Council currently has 1,200 council houses that are sitting empty, which costs our tenants and the housing revenue account £2 million. One thousand and two hundred council houses out of our stock of, I think, 22,000, is a large number, and they could go a long way in helping the homelessness situation.

Improving access to early interventions will, I hope, reduce the need to use temporary accommodation facilities. Although temporary accommodation provides a safety net for those at risk of homelessness, it can prove to be very expensive for local authorities and tenants alike. Ensuring that quick access to sustainable accommodation and suitable support is available if homelessness occurs will help to stop the cycle of homelessness that can happen. Putting in place adequate support to sustain existing tenancies will also save the individuals involved from the incredibly stressful and traumatic experience of going through the homelessness process to get rehoused.

At this point, I would like to say a big thank you to the team at Aberdeen City Council. Kay Diack and her homelessness unit do an absolutely brilliant job. Engaging with tenants who are facing homelessness has been successfully implemented in Aberdeen, and the council, in partnership with Turning Point, is running a housing first scheme to support tenants with multiple needs to move away from homelessness. Housing first is proven to be successful in supporting people who have histories of repeat homelessness and who experience multiple disadvantages into independent and stable accommodation. Once housed, they are provided with supportive services and connections to community-based support so that they sustain their housing and avoid returning to homelessness.

It is essential that we look to strengthen our existing homelessness prevention legislation and ensure that there is a duty on public bodies to ask people about their housing situation and take action if needed, as early intervention is absolutely key. Placing a legal duty on health and social care services, children’s services, police and other public bodies to ask and act to prevent homelessness really will be game changing for people who are potentially facing homelessness.

I whole-heartedly support the motion.

We move to the closing speeches.

15:59  

I draw members’ attention to my entry in the register of members’ interests.

It is unacceptable that far too many people in Scotland today are forced to experience the trauma of homelessness. There was a 3 per cent increase in the numbers last year. According to the Scottish Government’s report, “Homelessness in Scotland: 2020 to 2021”, a quarter of homeless households have children. That is a worrying statistic.

Indeed, it is worrying that, in this day and age, under the Scottish National Party, child poverty is on the rise, the cost of living is on the rise and many children are living from day to day without the security of a safe place to sleep. The SNP-Green Government must put the welfare and safety of children first.

Carol Mochan talked about the devastation that homelessness causes for individuals. The consultation on the duty to prevent homelessness is an opportunity to change things and look at how we can intervene early and provide joined-up services. Mark Griffin said that all services should have a duty to prevent homelessness, as some services can pick up issues much earlier than council departments that deal directly with homelessness can. The point was amplified by Tess White. People need to be given help and assistance before they become homeless—that is key.

Mark Griffin also talked about the £1 billion cut that local government faces, which means that councils cannot react in the way that we want them to. Councils are at the front line of prevention and rehousing, but they are underfunded.

Carol Mochan talked about her lack of confidence in the new initiative due to the lack of investment. Willie Rennie made that point, too. Without investment, the policy will be useless and will be just another empty promise from this Government.

We need early intervention—it is a must. Miles Briggs said that people seek help when they are homeless rather than beforehand, but we often hear of people who are threatened with homelessness being told to stay put until they are actually homeless. I have come across that in my casework. That means that the change in the person’s housing situation goes largely unplanned. Ruth Maguire and Elena Whitham were right to say that people should have choice, but at a time of crisis there is no choice. Early intervention is key.

Mark Griffin, Willie Rennie and several other members talked about the change from “permanent” to “stable” when it comes to the right to accommodation. I know that the cabinet secretary heard that, and I hope that she takes on board the point, which has been made by Shelter and which was emphasised throughout the debate.

A major cause of homelessness in rural areas is the rise of second homes and the holiday homes market, as Ariane Burgess and Emma Roddick said. Young people simply cannot compete when they are on low wages or have unstable incomes, and they can be forced to move miles away from home, probably into towns and cities. However, the Scottish Government is not building affordable homes in rural areas or taking measures to retain such homes for the local population. I recently heard that only two housing associations are building in the Highland Council area, because it is close to impossible to retain the houses.

Rhoda Grant has raised the issue of short-term lets. As Emma Roddick pointed out, legislation to control short-term lets was important. Will Rhoda Grant say how Labour voted on the short-terms lets legislation just a few weeks ago?

As the cabinet secretary knows, the legislation on short-term lets was not right and did not take account of local circumstances. Had the Government been keener to devolve power to local authorities to shape it in the right away, it could have made a real difference.

Will the member take an intervention on that point?

I am not sure that I have time.

Ms Grant, I can give you a bit of time back if you want to take the intervention.

Okay.

The whole point was that many of the powers in that regard were devolved to local authorities to use as they see fit. I just do not understand why Labour supported the approach in committee but voted against it in the chamber. That does not make sense.

It does make sense. The cabinet secretary knows well that my colleague Mark Griffin tried hard to make that legislation acceptable to people in Scotland, especially in rural areas, where short-term lets can provide an income. It has to be balanced with population retention. If we do not do that, it will not work.

I will speak quickly about domestic abuse. Many of us have been contacted by constituents who are homeless at a desperate point in their lives. Many of them have had no choice but to flee. I agree with Elena Whitham that they should be supported to keep and stay in their own homes, but many are far too traumatised to do so. We need to ensure that there is safe and secure accommodation for them and their children, to support them in rebuilding their lives.

Willie Rennie and Jeremy Balfour talked about the intervention that took place during Covid, taking people off the streets and putting a roof over their heads. That shows that, where there is a will, there is a way. We can end homelessness only if sufficient resources are provided to local authorities. Putting additional responsibilities on local authorities without the funding will mean that there is no change. The Scottish Government needs to enable them to look after the people who are most in need at the time when they need it.

16:06  

I am grateful for the opportunity to close the debate on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives.

Reducing and preventing homelessness should be a priority for Governments of all colours. Preventing homelessness is not only already a statutory obligation in many cases, but clearly a moral obligation.

We have heard much about the context of homelessness in Scotland today. It is clear that there is much more to do to tackle the problem. The latest figures, which were released today, are a stark reminder of the situation, and make for uncomfortable reading. It is not acceptable that nearly 5,000 adults in Scotland sleep rough at least once a year and that thousands of individuals are in temporary accommodation the length and breadth of Scotland.

Given that situation, I welcome what is to be, and has been, discussed in the prevention of homelessness duties consultation, which was launched jointly by the Scottish Government and COSLA last month. The consultation is right to talk about the fight against homelessness being a shared responsibility, and to stress the importance of intervention in cases of possible homelessness. It also mentions the importance of protecting women who have been made homeless as a result of domestic abuse. That is vital, because there might be many more such women than we are aware of from statistics.

There is much to be done to ensure that the proposals become a reality. We are talking about reality; not words, but actions. For example, although Shelter Scotland has welcomed the £10 million that has been committed to ending homelessness together in next year’s budget, it says that that does not go far enough and that more is required.

It is right that councils are expected to carry out their duties to deal with homelessness, but their budgets are being cut. They know their responsibilities and are trying to do the best they can, but they need resources behind them, which many members have spoken about in the debate. Councils will take on more duties and obligations, so they must be given support to do that.

On the measures that are proposed in the consultation, Shelter Scotland has expressed the opinion that the only way to deal with the cycle of homelessness is to build more homes. That is a fact, but there remains a significant difference between what is needed and what is talked about in relation to social housing. The problem has not been helped by the Scottish Government’s having missed its target for building affordable housing in the previous parliamentary session.

The level of investment needs to be greater. The Chartered Institute of Housing Scotland has said that the £831 million that has been committed to affordable housing in next year’s budget is “still not enough” for the SNP to meet its target of building 110,000 affordable houses by 2032.

It is clear that the battle against homelessness continues and is a struggle. As far back as 2018, the Scottish Government stated its target in the “Ending Homelessness Together: High Level Action Plan” that it had put together, but that plan still needs to ensure that homelessness is tackled.

Following on from that, three years later we see that housing first has been talked about and praised, but much more still needs to be done to ensure that housing first is a reality. It is not happening across Scotland—only pilots and projects are taking place. If we are to tackle the issue, we need to ensure that the funding is there. There has been £10.8 million of investment in the housing first scheme, but more needs to be done. We have talked about measures such as our proposed help to rent scheme. That would help to move things forward.

I thank all those who have given us briefings, including Shelter Scotland and other charities. I also want to talk about some of the contributions from members. My colleague Miles Briggs talked about suitable and stable homes. They are part of the process, but to ensure that there are such homes, there has to a balance between what is taking place and the funding that goes with it.

We must also talk about drug misuse, mental health issues, the lack of funding, sustainable accommodation and social care. We see that three to six times more people are falling between the cracks and are even dying in Scotland because of their situation. They have mental health issues and social housing issues; those are part of the mix. Mark Griffin said that there is collective responsibility; the Government and councils have a collective responsibility to deal with the issue of sustainable accommodation.

Willie Rennie gave us some stark statistics. He mentioned 27,000 homeless people and 13,000 in temporary accommodation, including 7,500 children. Action needs to be taken, but we cannot do that when hundreds of millions of pounds are being removed from budgets.

Tess White gave a passionate speech about her region, and talked about housing first being escalated across Scotland. She also talked about applications, but we need social, health, children’s, police and prison services to work together to make sure that we can achieve that.

Jeremy Balfour talked about cross-party support. There is cross-party support, but we cannot cope when one individual every 19 minutes becomes homeless. We want homelessness to be eradicated by 2026 and we believe that that can be achieved.

We are all aware that there is no single cause of homelessness or single solution to it, but my party believes that it is possible to end rough sleeping by 2026. It is clear that that is possible only with significant action on and investment in the issue.

I conclude by urging the Government to use a multipronged approach to tackle homelessness, and I urge it to leave no stone unturned, because the people of Scotland deserve that approach and we should provide it.

16:12  

I welcome the contributions from across the chamber in what has, in the main, been a constructive debate on taking forward the consultation on the proposals. I will refer to as many speeches as I can and will pick up on a couple of issues that were raised.

Miles Briggs was right when he said that it is not just about bricks and mortar. It is also about access to services, whether they are addiction services or support services. That is what the housing first model and the rapid rehousing housing plans are based on.

Mark Griffin talked about the comments of Crisis and the Salvation Army in relation to funding. I make the point that some of those comments predate the announcement of and additional £50 million in the programme for government. I will talk about resources later, because the subject was raised by a number of members.

On Willie Rennie’s point, I say that stakeholders have said that our legislation is world leading. On the language, I point out that housing being “suitable and stable” was a recommendation of people who have lived experience of homelessness. Such housing is an option for those who are at risk of homelessness that can be prevented. Provision of permanent housing is the duty when a person is assessed by a council as being unintentionally homeless. That will not change. It is about choice for people who are at risk of becoming homeless and about options for people who are homeless. We are talking about slightly different things; I hope that that is clear. It is important to recognise the wishes, in relation to language, of people who have lived experience of homelessness.

I very much recognise Elena Whitham’s experience and knowledge of the need to work upstream, her input to the work of the prevention review group before coming to Parliament as an MSP and her highlighting of the needs of domestic abuse victims.

Tess White talked about Dundee. I think that, in many respects, I understand more fully than anybody else in the chamber the issues of mental ill health and drug deaths in the city, and how important it is to resolve them and to move forward. On her comment about housing first, Dundee City Council has gone quite far on closure of hostels, which is what we want. It was one of the pathfinders for housing first and is using organisations including Scottish Women’s Aid to provide specialist services to people who need such services in the city. I think that her portrayal of housing first was not wholly fair.

The Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee has been told, among other statistics, that between 5 per cent and 8 per cent of people who need support will need assisted living support. What is the Government’s view on that and how such support can be funded? It is a really important issue for which local authorities need additional support.

Local authorities sometimes struggle in that area, so I have asked officials to look in more detail at how we could help them in relation to support for people who have very complex needs.

Ruth Maguire talked about affordability; the new deal for tenants has affordability of rent levels at its heart.

Carol Mochan talked about council funding; I will come back to that. The only point that I will make is that we can see from statistics that 24 of the 32 local authorities have made progress on reducing use of temporary accommodation, so there is something to be said for sharing best practice and adopting what works across all local authorities.

Ariane Burgess made the point that prevention pathways are important for those who are at greater risk of homelessness. Emma Roddick gave a very powerful testimony of her own lived experience and spoke about the need for consistent action—for example, on second homes and short-term lets. That is something on which members perhaps need to reflect.

Jeremy Balfour talked about resources; I will talk about resources more generally. In addition to the resources for local government, we have put a huge amount—£100 million—into ending homelessness. In the draft budget, we have maintained the £23.5 million that has been allocated to local authorities annually for homelessness prevention and response measures. We have provided a further £10 million from the ending homelessness together fund for next year.

In addition, we have a discretionary housing payment budget of £80 million, which councils monitor and administer on our behalf, and £68 million of which is for mitigation of the bedroom tax. I am all for political choices, but it is a bit difficult when members come here asking us to make different political choices when political choices that have been made by the UK Government impact directly on our budgets. If we did not have to use £68 million to mitigate the bedroom tax, we could spend that nearly £70 million on other homelessness services. The political choices that we make are important, but so are the political choices that are made by others that impact directly on our budgets. That is, perhaps, something on which the Tories here should reflect.

In addition to all that, we have allocated £831 million for affordable homes this year, which is part of £3.5 billion that will be allocated over this parliamentary session. I make the point that that is head and shoulders above what any other Government in these islands is delivering on affordable housing. Although I accept that there is more to do, there has to be some recognition of the resources that this Government is putting into housing and addressing homelessness.

I will mention a couple of other issues. Jackie Dunbar spoke about voids. There has been an issue with turning voids around because of the pandemic, for all the reasons that we understand. We want, of course, to ensure that local authorities turn voids around as quickly as possible. If members understood it, they would see that the problem is about getting tradespeople and supplies in order that voids can be turned around. Global supply issues are hampering councils’ ability to do that.

Rhoda Grant said that she wants more action to address short-term lets. In my intervention, I made the point that consistency on that issue is important, because we need to give local authorities the basket of powers that they require in order to address it.

Finally, there is a lot of consensus that prevention is better than a cure for homelessness. The earlier we can intervene to prevent homelessness through the measures that we are already taking, as well as the measures that are included in the proposals that we are consulting on, the more we can support people to avoid homelessness in the first place, which I am determined to do.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

Shona Robison, the cabinet secretary, misrepresented what I said about the housing first team in Dundee. I said quite the opposite. Members can look back at the text; I said that the team had been “cut to the bone” and that it needs more support. I was misrepresented.

Thank you for that. It was not a point of order; it is not a matter for the Presiding Officer. The Presiding Officer is not responsible for the content of statements that are made by members. There is a corrections mechanism for the Official Report, which the member might wish to look into.

That concludes the debate on prevention of homelessness duties.