Seòmar agus comataidhean

Yes. I think that £400 million was set aside. The UK Government made its estimate and there are consequentials that come through. However, the more we get into the process, the more that cost will be. That is why it is important to reach agreement with the developers on who is responsible for what. There are resource costs, and there are the costs of our initial assessment. That is one of the main reasons why getting agreement and moving that forward is so important. The principle of the developer meeting the cost is an important part of it. Again, however, the process will evolve as we move through it.

As a general principle, the key focus at the moment is on residential buildings. There have been discussions about hotels and hospitals. Stephen Garvin has been involved in those, so I will bring him in. As I said, the key focus at the moment is on buildings with residents. Hotels and hospitals are responsible for their buildings, to a certain extent, but there have been discussions about how we can work with them.

I will bring Stephen Garvin in to comment on the 2022 act in England. If we decide to proceed with legislation, we will look to introduce it in early autumn. We would need to come back and speak to the committee about that. If we identify things that need to be brought forward and we need to get more clarity and more powers to deal with them, we will probably look to do it after the recess and to push legislation forward in an expedited process.

We recognise the importance of having as many powers as we need to move things forward and quicken the pace. That shows our urgency about what we need to do. We will keep the committee informed if that is where we decide to go. If an expedited process is required, we will come back to the committee about that as soon as possible.

I invite Stephen to comment on the 2022 act and anything else he wants to raise.

I am sorry, convener. I do not want to get on the wrong side of you, so I will shut up now. [Laughter.]

Oh, was it at you? I was used to getting a row off the convener before, so it is a habit.

With registration and so on?

I will bring Stephen Garvin in on that. I do not know what we do at the moment.

Good morning, and thank you for the opportunity to speak on the important topic of building safety. My most recent appearance before the committee was just two weeks ago As always, it is good to be back.

The Government’s absolute priority is the safety of residents and home owners. The Grenfell Tower tragedy provided absolute clarity on why building safety is so important. As the committee will be aware, immediately after the Grenfell Tower fire, we established a ministerial working group on building and fire safety. Since then, substantial progress has been made, with changes to fire safety standards and guidance, and further measures being taken, including legislation on smoke alarms, to address safety in buildings. The ministerial working group continues to meet and will address actions on building safety matters, working with key partner organisations such as the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service.

Safety is the reason why we have established a cladding remediation programme. I am determined to ensure that we identify, assess and remediate buildings with potentially unsafe cladding. Currently, 105 buildings are on the cladding remediation programme. Each of those buildings will go through a comprehensive technical assessment through a single building assessment. A single building assessment is a complex expert assessment. As we have already heard this morning, it is crucial that we take the time to get that assessment right, since it is the basis of all further work on the building. If experts identify an urgent issue during the assessment, we will take immediate action to safeguard residents.

However, I appreciate that, for many home owners, this process has taken too long. Last year, we changed our approach to the programme, moving from a grant model to a direct procurement model, which has led to a real increase in the pace of delivery.

Finally, I will update the committee on the Scottish safer buildings accord. The process has taken longer than we had hoped and has been complicated by the nature of the Scottish tenure system. However, I am pleased that we have made positive progress on the accord, as the committee heard earlier from Fionna Kell. I can confirm that a number of developers have sent or are in the process of sending in developer commitment letters on the accord. That is an important step. We will now move to discussing the long-term legally binding agreement.

I can also confirm that we are looking urgently at legislative options to ensure that we remove barriers to support the delivery of the programme, to keep residents safe and to hold developers to account. We continue to work hard to remediate cladding issues for home owners and residents to ensure that we deliver a commitment to safeguard residents and home owners.

Thank you again for inviting me along. I look forward to answering your questions.

Again, I heard that mentioned earlier this morning. The first bit of work is the single building assessment, which is fully funded by the Scottish Government, so there will be no cost to residents and tenants in that regard. In my previous answer, I mentioned the accord, which is about the developer taking responsibility for the remediation work. We have been clear about that, which is why it was important to reach the accord. The owners should not have to pay anything for that.

The other issue worth mentioning is that, although we have been dealing with buildings in respect of which we know who the owners are, there are also orphan buildings. It is important to mention that there is a public cost there. There is no cost to residents.

I will bring in Stephen Garvin on that. Obviously, the tenure system in Scotland has been established for quite a while. Stephen can talk about the issue specifically in relation to cladding.