Seòmar agus comataidhean

A resource review for planning, which the Royal Town Planning Institute has been involved with, is under way. Craig McLaren is working on that and he has appeared at the committee to discuss it. Joe FitzPatrick and I hosted a round table with a number of developers from Homes for Scotland and other groups about three or four months ago, and we have another round table planned. One of the key issues that was discussed was how we develop the placemaking element, because I think that that is incredibly important for how we deliver for communities, rather than just considering how we deliver housing. The resource review is picking up on that issue.

You will remember the discussions that we had in the committee about NPF4 over a number of months—it felt like years at the time—on how we get the transition from NPF3 to NPF4 right, particularly with local development plans. Again, when we talk about the resource review, that is important. When we had the round table with the heads of planning, we talked about how that transition would work. Another round table is planned on that point.

Placemaking is essential; it is incredibly important. The resource element is part of that. As I said, there are on-going discussions about NPF4 and how it fits into local development plans, which we have discussed here in the committee. How we transition from NPF4 to local development plans, when they all take place at slightly different times, was always going to be a challenge. As I said, the resource review will play an important part in looking at that.

Local place plans need to fit in with local development plans. We are talking about not just housing, but green space and how we encourage business growth. In the work that we are doing, one of the key things is working with Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks and local authorities on renewables hubs in Scotland. We are looking at what that means for temporary accommodation, opportunities for legacy housing and how we support business. A lot of work is going on with SSEN, which I will touch on later.

How we support business development will have an influence. We are looking at business, green space and the viability of high streets, for example, which you and I have chatted about, and has to do with town centres—that has to be an element. Placemaking is about not just new housing, but how everything fits in. Local place plans are an exciting part of what the Government is trying to do and everyone supports them. They can be complex, but they need to be community based, not developed only by the local authorities, for example. There needs to be an element of support for local communities who would like to develop those plans themselves. We need to make sure that those plans are resourced in local authorities, which is why the resource review is important.

When we were in London, housing associations made that point during discussions that we had with the investment sector. Those things will be discussed and we will look at that point. Very quickly after the Housing (Scotland) Bill was published, I had a meeting with you, as Opposition spokesman, and Mr Griffin, and we will continue to be open about that issue—I wanted a very open and transparent process with you in that regard. Those things have been identified, and we will look at them and at broader investment opportunities, too.

A key point is that the housing investment task force was brought together to try to get the views of other stakeholders. We talked about the housing deliverability review and the input of stakeholders and I mentioned in my opening speech that I cannot deliver the ambitions in “Housing to 2040” on my own. We need support, influence and thoughts and ideas from the sector; it is very much about trying to look at that broader approach.

The other really important thing, which Homes for Scotland talked about, is how we develop the small and medium-sized enterprise market in Scotland to ensure that it plays an important part. It is not just about housing developers. Homes for Scotland members were there during discussions on how we support SMEs, and they feed into that process.

Again, it comes back to where housing associations will sit. The group will look into those issues in a lot more detail and will come forward with recommendations to Government. It is incredibly important to think about how we can flex the finance in the housing sector, not just in Scotland but across the UK, because, for example, there are guarantees that the UK Government has that we do not have that would make a massive difference. Again, we need to look at barriers and opportunities around what can be done and what might work in that regard. That is part of the broader work that is going on that feeds into the 2032 target around deliverability.

There are a few other things that I want to touch on with regard to demand and the opportunities around that in places such as town centres and city centres. Laura Dougan might want to say something about that.

I agree. I go back to the acquisitions policy. The City of Edinburgh Council is cognisant of that and is working with that. We have had discussions with the council about how it allocates properties, which is really important. There are other pieces of work going on around that, one of which relates to prevention duties, for example. I had a meeting with One Parent Families Scotland that included some young women who had ended up in a homeless situation. Part of that was due to the fact that they were not aware of what benefits they were entitled to, including the Scottish child payment and other benefits. For example, discretionary housing payments are important.

Again, that comes back to asks to be made of a new UK Government in October or November. We spend £90 million a year on discretionary housing payments. I would love to be in the position to spend £90 million a year to support families and get them out of temporary accommodation. Therefore, that is a very clear ask to be made of the UK Government that comes in in October or November or whenever the election will be—to ensure that we do not have to pay that £90 million.

I mentioned the discussions with COSLA and ALACHO. The issues that you mentioned with regard to families have been mentioned in those discussions. Other models could be looked at, including with regard to supported accommodation. For example, you and I have talked about the work of Rowan Alba. What do we need to do with regard to supported accommodation? The City of Edinburgh Council is looking at how we can support that model. There is an element of social investment in that regard and, again, we have had a number of discussions with investors in relation to that area. Rowan Alba is one example. Other homelessness charities in Edinburgh are looking at that.

At the discussion last week in London, there was an institutional investor who funds homelessness accommodation using a lease model. They are working with certain local authorities in London, and that model has worked. Investors get a low rate of return, but the money that has been saved on temporary accommodation costs, which you mentioned, more than meets that. Talking to institutional investors about a lease model could provide that opportunity.

That is one of the issues that will be taken forward. How can we look at different ways to finance provision? You are right that we spend far too much money on temporary accommodation. We need to build more houses, but we also need to look at more models for temporary accommodation in order to get those figures down, again working on allocations and acquisitions on a short-term basis. We mentioned voids and empty homes. We need to look at different models. With COSLA and ALACHO, we are discussing those models and what we need to do to take those forward on a more national level. We need to look at other models for delivering temporary accommodation units and see how we can make those work in Scotland. That will be part of the work that the housing investment task force looks at.

One of the most important points is that we have a representative from tenants and residents on the housing to 2040 strategy group. It is really important to feed their point of view into that work. It was recognised that that representative is a really important member of that group. I have been to a number of tenants and residents group meetings and to conferences where that has been discussed.

I was a councillor for 15 years and tried to set up tenants and residents groups. Such groups are a really important part of what goes on. The very point that there is such a representative on the housing to 2040 group is incredibly important, because they can then feed into the wider strategy as they engage with the group.

I try to meet representatives of tenants and residents groups every six months to discuss the matter—a national organisation represents them—and I have spoken at a number of tenants and residents conferences on the particular point in question and answer sessions, for example. Having their views represented in the strategy group is important. I also meet them regularly to discuss some of their issues.

Retrofitting and what it looks like comes into play when tenants and residents speak to their groups. Part of the challenge with retrofitting is communication, which we have talked about. At the moment, we are talking about the development stage; once we start moving on that, we will move beyond the local heat and energy efficiency strategies to look at what retrofitting actually means for authorities, housing associations and private residents. That is really important for tenants and residents groups, which can come in and feed into the work. Indeed, they have to, because we need to develop real change: although it is a big challenge to deliver it, we all know that we need to do it. Tenants and residents groups are an incredibly important part of the work, so I look forward to discussing the matter with them.

That is an important question, and the housing to 2040 strategy acknowledges that. The rural and island housing action plan came out in October 2023. Again, there was a review and there were indicators for the short term, medium term and long term. There is a review going on with regard to the short-term indicators. I said that I would come back to the committee or Parliament to provide an update on the rural housing action plan one year on. We are very transparent about that and are happy to come back to the committee or Parliament in October.

Last year, I indicated how important it was to me that I make visits. I will go out again this year because the situation is very different in rural communities. I have talked about the importance of the work that SSEN is doing. I come back to the point about the renewables hubs. On the requirement for the Western Isles, we are talking about the work bringing in roughly 1,000 jobs. That work cannot just be around the main population centres, but must be spread across all the communities. The same applies in Inverness, Shetland and Orkney, for example. That needs to be developed.

On the importance of that, we have talked about the rural housing funding, including for key workers. More needs to be done on that with local authorities. I mentioned that I was talking to Argyll and Bute Council about that. We need a strategic overview. We had a round-table meeting with some key employers. Therefore, work is being carried out in that regard.

However, the key thing is that I come back to make a statement to the committee or Parliament. I said at the start of the process that we are happy to do that in order to be held to account for how successful the rural and islands housing action plan is in relation to the aims of the housing to 2040 strategy and with regard to what we need to do. That work will continue to develop.

Three or four years ago, the opportunities around renewables would not have been considered, but those are now an incredibly important part of what we need to do. Those opportunities can bring jobs and housing, so how do we ensure that we connect housing and employability? If we do not get that bit right, it will create problems around homelessness, but that will also be an opportunity to tie this in to legacy housing, which SSEN is keen to sit down to discuss with us.

I am happy to come back to committee or the Parliament in October. We had indicated that we would do that, anyway. It is an incredibly important part of what we need to do because, as you said, the situations in urban and rural communities are completely different.

We talked about construction inflation. You can probably add another 15 per cent to 20 per cent to the costs of delivering homes in rural communities as a result of that inflation, which makes that work even more challenging. The discussions that we have been having with local authorities about housing in rural communities have been about how we can deliver key worker funding, how we can look at the renewables opportunities and so on. Those issues all tie together.

I will come back to the specific point about the housing investment task force. It was asked not only to look at funding for urban communities but to have a real focus on rural housing. How do we ensure that we do not look only at urban communities but that we look at opportunities in rural areas and how we fund them, and at the particular challenges that those communities face? That will be referenced in the housing investment task force reports. It is a key piece of work.

The housing investment task force was pulled together for that reason. It includes banks, institutional investors, local authorities and housing associations, and it will look at the barriers to investment as well as the opportunities. That piece of work is really important. The feedback that we had from the first meeting was incredibly positive. I have not looked at the potential funders that are involved, but that is one part of it.

In October, I met 25 institutional investors in London to talk about the subject, and on Thursday I will have a round table to talk about it and the Housing (Scotland) Bill. We are also talking about broader flex in the finance system and how we get SNIB and the SFT involved, as well as how we look at hubco. That is not about institutional investment; it is about trying to flex the system that we already have. I have talked about how the use of guarantees, for example, would be useful in relation to what can be offered to investors.

Lots of discussions are going on. The housing investment task force is the main player, but there are lots of pieces of work going on around that. I have had about half a dozen round-table meetings with institutional investors, and that relationship will continue to develop, particularly through the housing investment task force, which will report on what it thinks the barriers and opportunities are in terms of flexing the whole system. We need to do that in order not to replace but to supplement the funding that already exists, because the demand is there, pure and simple. We need to look at different opportunities to bring in money, and institutional investment is an incredibly important part of that.

The issue is relevant not only to housing. I have talked about the lease model in parts of London that operates in relation to the provision of temporary accommodation. There is also social investment in housing through work with homelessness charities. I know that about half a dozen places in Scotland are already looking at that model, and it is already in operation in some places.

We need to flex the system, but institutional investment is vital in what we need to do.

If we do not, I am sure that he will tell us.

I will bring Kate Hall in on that. As I said, discussions about building safety are on-going every day. There is obviously an element between the SBA process and moving towards remediation, in which there is assessment of whether there are immediate risks and where those sit. Again, that is different for every developer and every building. Kate Hall or Rachel Sunderland might want to come in on your specific point. Developers have raised that with us, as well.

I will bring in Kate Hall or Rachel Sunderland in a moment.

In the discussions that we have had, we have considered the approach that the UK Government has taken—there are on-going discussions on that. We have been talking to the SMEs, including in the Homes for Scotland context, about what that looks like.

This is a really important issue, so I am not just looking at the SME sector as a whole. We are speaking to individual developers and asking them where they sit. Even though we are considering a similar approach to that of the UK Government, our approach has to be based on what the developers tell us. There is always a balance: we want to remediate buildings as quickly as possible, but there is not much point in doing that if we lose five or six developers as a result of their not having the ability to pay.

That has been a really important approach. I emphasise the individual discussions that I and officials have had. As I said, our door is open. This is very much a partnership as we move forward, and we need to learn about that through the pilot programme.

Rachel or Kate might want to come in on the point about the profit threshold.