Seòmar agus comataidhean

Again, I think that Yvette Sheppard talked about such circumstances. First, as she touched on, there would be an option for us to go back if we think that the data is not sufficient. If that is still the case when the data comes back, we would have to take it as an individual circumstance, but I think that the minister has the ability to do what you said. There are a number of points before we even get to that regarding whether the data that the authority provides backs up sufficiently what it proposes. That is where issues of broader local consideration come in.

I do not know whether Yvette wants to add anything other than what was added before. Again, there is the procedure of looking at the data that comes forward to work out whether we think that the data that the authority has collected is sufficient and sufficiently supports what it proposes.

It might be the other way round—the authority might come forward and say that it does or does not recommend a rent control area. There are different circumstances. I do not know whether Yvette wants to add anything to what she added before.

I will try to keep them short.

On the general question of personalisation, I met the Dogs Trust before I was a minister and, knowing that a housing bill would be coming up, the trust raised that issue. It said that it can be helpful for an elderly person, or for someone who cannot get out of their home because of illness, to have a dog as a companion. That was raised two and a bit years ago, before I was a minister, and I think that it is really important.

I have visited the Scottish Association of Landlords to talk about the matter. Procedure is the key thing and must be in place. Is the pet a wee Chihuahua or a great Dane? I might be exaggerating, but the dog has to be appropriate to the size of the property. To me, the onus should be on the tenant to look at that, but we are trying to be as flexible as possible. We will see what that looks like in more detail when the regulations come in.

Regarding landlords, it is all about making sure that they are aware of the procedure and that they have the ability, within reason, to say, for example, that you cannot have a great Dane in a one-bedroom flat. It is about recognising the importance of people having pets as companions and striking the balance. That is a key thing.

I will try to be brief, convener. There are a couple of points. One is that funding was announced last week, from which Edinburgh will benefit significantly. We have been working with the City of Edinburgh Council on its practices around void properties in terms of what it needs to do. The council thinks that it is making progress, so we have tried to help it. In addition, there is an upcoming round table with utility companies—housing conveners raised the issue of utility companies with us in a meeting—and local authorities on how we can improve the practice in that regard. Utility companies need to be doing more and working more quickly in that regard. That work is already under way. The housing investment task force is also looking at different funding models around accommodation and so on.

I am happy to pick that up in the discussions that we have planned. If there is anything that you think we could consider as an amendment to the bill, I am happy to discuss that, but other things are already going on to provide support on void properties. As you recognise, the issue is incredibly important in Edinburgh specifically, and I am happy to take that offline with you.

I think that you are right, Mr Briggs, looking at the matter legally. The point that you make will be looked at sympathetically, and there have already been broader discussions about the process for adaptations and succession, as Charlotte McHaffie mentioned.

I supported the national outcome on housing before I became minister. It was discussed by various groups, and its importance for housing has been recognised, with discussions about what the outcomes will actually look like. Indeed, it is still under discussion at the moment. I am happy to write back to the committee about that, as it is important.

Data will be an important aspect of rent controls and of determining what comes through on a local basis, as well as nationally. That goes back to the point about the nuanced approach. What levels of investment are coming through for mid-market rent, build to rent and other forms of investment in the housing sector? I think that that is measurable.

Like for any bill, we need to evaluate how effective the measures have been—through rent controls and rent increases, and through the levels of investment being made. We will write back to the committee with more details about the national outcome.

I have engaged extensively with stakeholders since the bill was published, as I did before then. When I took over responsibility for the bill from Mr Harvie, I reviewed what had been previously proposed. It was key for me to set out a bill that still protected people, where they need protection, from rent increases. That is the main point of the bill, which we indicated in the programme for government last week. The need for investment is also important, whether that is in the mid-market rent sector or the build-to-rent sector. We are engaging with stakeholders extensively on that and will continue to do so. There is no doubt that we need investment in order to build homes.

As we know, Government funding, whether it is in the United Kingdom or Scotland, is extremely tight at the moment and institutional investment will not replace the need for it. Although I hope that Government funding will expand and grow, we need investment in the sector, whether that is in the mid-market rent or the build-to-rent sectors. In the programme for government, we talked about the commitment to growing investment fund MMR stock.

About nine months ago, I also set up a housing investment task force, which brought together investors, banks, local authorities and the likes of the Scottish National Investment Bank and the Scottish Futures Trust, to look at how we can get more money into the sector. Rent controls have been part of those discussions. There are also other ways in which we can try to get money into the sector, and I am committed to making sure that we get investment into housing.

I take on board what investors have said, but I hope that what we achieve through the bill will allow investment to come into Scotland. There has already been investment, but we need more. Lots of developments need an all-tenure approach. Sometimes that will be done through local government and funding will be provided by local authorities and registered social landlords, but we also need institutional investment for that. In the bill and through what we are proposing with rent controls, I hope that we can strike that balance.

That would need to be set out, based on the broader situation. There are specific issues behind the rent increases in Edinburgh and Glasgow. We have talked about the opportunities around the freeport and renewables hubs in the Highlands. If construction workers go into those areas, how will that increase rents? That might be for the short term, but we need to take cognisance of it. For example, if workers are being attracted to the freeport area—Highland Council has estimated that there could be 25,000—we have to ensure that we are building houses at a level that meets that demand. We are having discussions with Highland Council about that and on the renewables hubs to consider the opportunities for accommodating construction workers and the legacy housing opportunities behind that. We need to take cognisance of other local impacts that there might be.

The flexibility allows us to look at controls in different parts of Scotland and the reasons behind that, but that has to be backed up by data.

I will bring in Yvette Sheppard on the specifics. The key thing is that local authorities will come forward with what they think, and we will look at that. Yvette might want to touch a wee bit on the broader consultation.

There are a number of ways in which that is being done. One is by having discussions; there are discussions among officials on that, which Yvette Sheppard can highlight.

Secondly, there are discussions with local authorities. I have talked to them about the resource issue, so the issue has been raised and that is important. The financial memorandum sets out an initial estimate of the costs. As we develop the bill, the financial memorandum will need to demonstrate the resources that are required.

Our discussions with local authorities are not just about what the data collection is about; they are also about the resource that is required to do it. That information will come in an updated financial memorandum. The discussions that we are having are looking at the resource for local authorities, because the point that you make is incredibly important: we cannot put additional pressures on local authorities without the resource. The discussions cover what resource is required to deliver the data that we are looking for. That has been raised by local authorities, and we are asking them to be more specific about that. The initial discussions are about estimates.