Seòmar agus comataidhean

We can come back to you on that.

Thank you, convener. I am happy to come back to the committee to discuss cladding whenever it requests.

I am pleased to be able to update the committee today on our work on cladding remediation since the Housing (Cladding Remediation) (Scotland) Act 2024 was passed in the summer. As we approach the act’s commencement, I would also like to set out how we intend to accelerate and broaden our action on cladding in the new year.

As we recognised at the time, the passing of the act in May and the publication of the single building assessment and specification in June were important milestones and laid essential foundations for our work. As the absence of such a statutory framework hampered progress on assessment and remediation in recent years, further work has, significantly, been carried out to allow commencement of the act, which will come into effect on Monday 6 January 2025. The regulations that will bring the act into effect are currently going through its parliamentary process.

As members know, the act’s centrepiece is the creation of the single building assessment, which is a statutory process by which the actions that are required to bring a building to a tolerable level of risk can be identified, and around which a range of powers and duties necessary for effective assessment and remediation has been built. The act also gives ministers the power to set standards for conducting such an assessment, and we are on track to publish on 6 January—the day of commencement—the full set of standards, building on the earlier specification.

I was also pleased to be able to share last week with the committee what we intend to be a final draft of the standards. I realise that for the owners and occupiers concerned this has been a deeply stressful time, but I am pleased to say that having the statutory framework in place will now facilitate a much-needed quickening of pace.

I can report to the committee that we have also been taking action in anticipation of the powers coming into effect. In particular, we have drawn from the properties in the original pilot to commission 13 priority single building assessments in circumstances where no developer has been identified and can lead and pay for the assessment and, if required, remediation. I know that the issue of orphan buildings was raised during the debate in the chamber, when the point was made that we had to ensure that such buildings did not fall behind those with identified owners, and I am glad to say that we are taking the issue forward at pace.

We expect the 13 assessments to be available to us in the new year, soon after the powers and duties of the act have come into effect. It will then be for the Scottish Government to consider the recommendations, communicate with the owners and residents affected, and set in train the process of remediation. We have already written to people in those buildings to confirm that the assessments have been commissioned.

In respect of the other entries in the pilot, an assurance process is continuing to ensure that they fall within the scope of the act and to find out whether a developer or other body is in place to take forward assessment and, if needed, remediation. Some of those cases might need to be taken forward by the Government, but in others, the outcome will be clearly communicated to the responsible body and to residents.

All of this means that 2025 will be the first year of substantial Scottish Government-led assessment and, where required, remediation. Of course, we would have wished this to have taken place earlier, but with learning from the pilot programme, the recognition of the particular issues of tenure that we face in Scotland and the development, passing and imminent commencement of the legislation, we are now in the position that we would want to be in, and substantial Government-led action can now proceed.

We have also made good progress with securing agreement on a new remediation contract with the large developers, which have already accepted the responsibility for assessment and remediation of the buildings that they developed. Discussions are at an advanced stage and we hope that, once agreed, the contract will unlock a further programme of assessment and remediation in 2025.

What next? As we approach the important milestone of commencement, it is essential that we ask ourselves that simple question. I can tell the committee today that on 6 January, the day of commencement, we will publish a renewed statement of our priorities and action on cladding, and I will now give the committee an indication of some of the themes in that statement.

First, we will look to increase the pace of action on cladding, and we intend to do so by introducing two new assessment and remediation schemes beyond the pilot scheme. One will centre on a new open call for buildings that are potentially affected by unsafe cladding, and it will enable owners and residents in buildings that are affected by cladding, but in respect of which no owner or developer has been able or willing to take forward assessment and remediation at their own hand, to bring the matter to the Government’s attention and to be considered for Government-led assessment and mediation.

A further complementary scheme will have its own schedule of buildings that appear to be at elevated risk from cladding. With that risk-based approach, we will work with local authorities and fire services to help to identify the buildings that should be prioritised, and I have already contacted local authorities on that basis. We will also consider where responsibilities for taking forward assessment and remediation should lie, including whether the Scottish Government has a part to play. With those complementary schemes, we aim to empower owners and residents to take steps towards assessment and remediation of their buildings and to support and accelerate action where the risks are highest.

I am also pleased to note that last week’s draft budget proposed substantial provision of £52.2 million in 2025-26 to support the acceleration of the action on cladding that we are now taking forward. However, as well as increasing the pace of action on cladding, we also want to increase the breadth of action on cladding in 2025. Government needs to be a very active and positive player in such action, but we also need to harness the skills, knowledge and capacity of others if we are to have the greatest effect. That is reflected in our intention to work with partners to identify the highest-risk properties, as I have already described.

More generally, though, we need to make action on cladding a collective national endeavour, where all parties are asked and enabled to play their part. That is particularly relevant in the area of social housing. If people are to be protected in the way that we want them to be, we need to work even more closely and co-operatively with local authorities and registered social landlords to make sure that the necessary actions are being taken, seeking assurance where appropriate, but also being prepared as a Government to play our part where needed.

For example, with properties that are partly owned by a registered social landlord but in which there is a mix of tenure, including private owners, the Government needs to be part of a solution and a way forward. Similarly, there might be properties that are wholly owned by a registered social landlord but it is not in a financial position to be able to take forward remediation. The Government needs to be prepared to consider funding issues on a case-by-case basis.

Our plan for 2025 will therefore include work to engage with local authorities, RSLs and other local partners to identify and prioritise buildings at risk from cladding, to seek assurance of action where that is appropriate and to provide help where it is needed. I have recently written to a range of local representatives to set the process in train, and as with all our work, I will keep the committee up to date with progress.

Finally, on communications, I would like to return to those who are the most important in these discussions: the people who live in the buildings affected by potentially unsafe cladding. I know that the issue of communications has been raised by the committee on a number of occasions, and I have already described how we will set up a route for people in that situation to raise their concerns with us through a new open call.

Beyond that, I commit to maintaining and expanding further the new approach to communication that we have taken forward in recent months, with a new monthly newsletter aimed at residents and updated material on the Government website, including frequently asked questions. There are also the duties on building-specific communications, which will apply when assessment and remediation is taken forward under the act. Stakeholders have told us that our communications have not been good enough; I have acknowledged that and we are taking action in response.

I hope that this has been a helpful update for the committee and a useful indication of our intended next steps. I look forward to discussing the issues with you.

On that point, it is important to note that part of the reason why we brought in the legislation was to allow us to move more quickly on the SBA process and to discuss issues around that. I acknowledge that the period of time to get us there is longer than I would have liked. When the bill came in, it gave us more clout to try to move things forward. Right from the start, I said to the developers that there would be very much a hand-in-hand relationship, as we needed to make sure that they were happy with what we were proposing and vice versa. More important is that that will give the people who live in the buildings confidence that the process is being carried out, is auditable and is at the level that it needs to be at. That is what took the time.

The bill gave us the ability to move things along more quickly. We now have a process in place that we, developers and tenants can see is auditable and is in a position for us to move forward with, and we can proceed at a pace that everybody is agreed on. However, I acknowledge that four years was far too long.

That is to do with a number of things. We have talked about the building blocks being put in place. One important part is to get in place the SBA process, because the buildings first need to be assessed before being remediated. That has taken slightly longer, but it is important that we get right the SBA process. If we do not get it right, that will stock up problems for the future.

At the moment, the spend is around £5 million, and it is estimated that it will be around £12 million. We, including Stephen Lea-Ross, have sat down and talked about the budget that is required. I am very confident about the pace of spend increasing next year, because we now have in place the building blocks. We have had discussions and we have partnerships and agreements with the developers, and we are not too far away from agreeing the remediation contract. All that will increase the pace of spend.

Have things taken a little longer than expected this year? Yes, they have, but it is important that we take the proper time for the SBA process, because it is quite literally the building block of everything else that we need to put in place.

I am confident, given what we have laid out previously and for this year, that the pace will quicken. I am quite happy to come back next year and to be held to account on the point. With a lot of the uncertainties that we had previously no longer there, the legislation in place and the agreements in place with developers, we can really quicken the pace.

Stephen, do you have anything you want to add on that particular point?

First of all, important publicity work is required to make tenants aware of the provisions—indeed, not just tenants but landlords. You would hope that the legislation would drive change in the sector anyway and that people would move away from the practice and operate legally, rather than being prosecuted. That is key.

We will obviously use the normal communication channels to make sure that we get that message out there, but we hope that, over a period of time—or very quickly—the legislation would drive the behaviour change that we need to make sure that people do not have to be prosecuted to stop the practice in the first place.

An important part of the discussion that we had about the Housing (Scotland) Bill was about how we get the message out there about what we are trying to do. This is a key part of the broader message.

We will also engage with landlords associations on what they need to do to get the message out. A small number of people is involved, but one is far too many. We will continue to work with tenants and landlords as we push forward with this, and I hope that it becomes part of the legislation.

I will bring in colleagues on whether other options were considered. At the moment, I think that £1,000 is sufficient, although we would obviously continue to assess the legislation.

As I said, one of the key things is that the provisions would, I hope, drive change pretty early on, so that we do not have as many convictions as we would otherwise have. Monitoring will be key, as with any legislation.

I do not know whether Craig Campbell or Laura McMahon wants to come in on what options were considered. I am aware that the fine is based on similar punishments that are already in place. We could look at landlord registration, which we have talked about. Does anybody else want to add anything?

It is not yet operational. I know that the committee has raised the issue previously, and it was raised during the passage of the bill. I am glad to announce that it will be operational on 6 January. That is an important step forward. We will communicate with the committee on that around 6 January.

Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the legislative consent memorandum to the United Kingdom Government’s Renters’ Rights Bill.

The relevant provisions in the bill will prohibit discrimination and restrictions against people with children or people in receipt of benefits. That aligns with the Scottish Government’s work on rented sector reform and will provide an important element of protection to those vulnerable groups in the private rented sector.

As the committee will recall, the provisions on rental discrimination were first introduced by the previous Conservative Government in the Renters’ Reform Bill, which did not pass prior to the UK Parliament being prorogued, following the calling of a general election. Consideration of the associated LCM in the Scottish Parliament was also halted, given that the bill had fallen.

I am pleased that the new UK Government has elected to include rental discrimination provisions in the Renters’ Rights Bill and that those provisions appear to have support from a wide range of political parties and stakeholders.

Although housing is a devolved matter, there are elements in the provisions that fall into the reserved area of financial services. In order to ensure that the full range of protections are able to come into effect in Scotland, the Scottish Government is seeking the Parliament’s consent to the UK Government’s legislating on the devolved area of housing, as set out in the LCM. By proceeding in that manner, we will ensure that the full extent of the provisions will come into effect in Scotland in the same way as they will come into effect in England and Wales.

I and my officials look forward to answering any questions that members may have on the LCM. Thank you.

I am sure that, when I was on the committee before I became a minister, I asked the same question. It is very relevant. When we were doing the previous assessments, that is something that we have not had an issue with. From working with colleagues across the UK on Grenfell, I know that that is a very relevant issue in that regard, as well as cladding. However, at the moment, all the Governments are quite confident that the skills are there. The sector is beginning to skill up, realising the work that is required. We have had numerous intergovernmental meetings, and officials have had numerous meetings on that particular point. I have a meeting coming up with my UK Government colleague, and we will be asking the same thing. However, we have been reassured that there is a sufficient skills base at the moment. The sector recognises the need for that skills base, and is taking on more people.

At the moment, we are confident about what we have in Scotland and across the rest of the UK, but we are aware of the increased demand following the Grenfell inquiry and the cladding work both here and across Britain. We will continue to keep an eye on the issue, as it is incredibly important. We do not want any delays as a result of a lack of the availability of skills. However, at the moment, I am confident about the position.

Stephen Lea-Ross might want to add to that.

I will try to address that in a number of ways and will then bring in Stephen Lea-Ross. The pilot buildings were identified, and the risk criteria are important. I talked about the breadth and what we need to do with RSLs and local authorities. They should have a list of buildings that fall into the category. The discussions that we will have with RSLs and local authorities will go into that in more detail. Local authorities have a responsibility to make sure that they have the data in place. In the discussions, we are trying to home in on that particular figure. Stephen Lea-Ross can say more about where we see that going.

I also mentioned the open call. If there are buildings that have not been picked up, what do we do about that and how do we take that forward? As part of the pilot programme, 107 buildings were identified, and that programme enabled us to learn, to pick things up and to deal with those that are most at risk.

Stephen, do you want to add anything on the open call, on local authorities and RSLs, and on how we intend to take that work forward? I return to my point about increasing the breadth.