Seòmar agus comataidhean

Did that answer your question, Pam?

I pass over to my colleague Marie McNair, who is joining us remotely and who has a question on this theme.

Jeremy Balfour will be followed by Emma Roddick, who is participating remotely.

The next theme is case transfer. I know that Jeremy Balfour has had his question answered, so we will move on to questions from Pam Duncan-Glancy.

Thank you, convener. I was reflecting on your suggestion about looking across the world for examples of how different countries operate. I can give an example that we should never follow. I grew up in Montreal, which is predominantly a city of renters, most of whom rent from the private sector. Leases run to 1 July every year. Every year on 1 July, about 70,000 households move. It is called Montreal moving day madness. We should never seek to emulate any such system.

My question reflects the issue that Miles Briggs raised, which Mark Griffin also touched on. We know that the private rented sector is a huge help to us in addressing homelessness. For many years, those who have been at risk of homelessness or who have been homeless have used the private rented sector to get secure tenancies. The changes that were made in 2016 strengthened those arrangements.

However, we know that, before the pandemic, there were a lot of evictions in the private rented sector. Do you think that the two specific provisions that we are considering will help to reduce that number? Do you think that they capture the recommendations from the reconvened HARSAG group, the social renewal advisory board’s housing policy circle and the Scotland prevention review group, which is now consulting on the prevention duties? I wish that those had been looked at in the early 2000s, when the Homelessness etc (Scotland) Bill was first considered. I would like to hear your thoughts on those issues.

Before I ask my questions—a lot of the questions that I was going to ask have already been asked and answered, which is fantastic—I declare an interest, in that I am a sitting councillor on East Ayrshire Council.

I will direct my first question to Matt Downie. I know that, for many years, Crisis has promoted the responsible use of the private rented sector for those who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. As we have heard, year on year before the pandemic, eviction levels from the private rented sector exceeded those from the social rented sector. How will the proposals in part 4 of the bill address that? Do the proposals capture all the recommendations and outputs from the reconvened homelessness and rough sleeping action group and the social renewal advisory board, especially now that we face the additional pressures of the cost of living crisis?

I will direct my second and final question to John Blackwood. At the height of the pandemic, we met as part of the private rented sector resilience group, which had been set up at the time. I am glad to hear anecdotal evidence that there was great support for landlords to work hand in hand with tenants to prevent homelessness, because, at the time, we spoke a lot about that and the need to distribute information on support. I know that this has already been touched on, but how could we improve that situation?

The Social Justice and Social Security Committee, which I convene, is holding an open inquiry into problem debt and poverty. We know that people who are in that situation often find it difficult to engage with services. There are landlords across the country who are not members of your association, so how do we join up all those services in order that the support agencies, councils and landlords can work on a cross-sector basis to prevent homelessness as far upstream as possible?

We heard from John Blackwood of the Scottish Association of Landlords that its members sought to do that collaborative work with their tenants, and we know that there is a varying picture across the sector, with landlords who are perhaps not involved in that association taking a different approach. What more can the Government do to ensure that the support services on the ground are adequately resourced and that there is clear guidance around what landlords, housing associations, support services in the wider area and, indeed, local authorities can do to work together across the sector to ensure that those pre-action protocols deliver the results that we need in order to prevent homelessness upstream?

That could perhaps be considered in relation to the landlord registration scheme. There might be a role for local authorities in communicating that information to landlords when they register with them—that duty could be placed on local authorities.

My final question, which follows on from Graeme Dey’s comments, concerns a possible unintended consequence of the policy.

We heard from John Blackwood that, if mandatory grounds are removed, landlords might find themselves in difficult circumstances in which the prevention of homelessness for that landlord becomes an issue. For example, they might need the property back because their financial circumstances mean that they have to sell it or move into it. To what extent will the tribunal take cognisance of that fact?

Our last question on this theme is from my colleague Emma Roddick, who is in the room. We will then move to theme 2 and questions from Marie McNair, who is participating remotely.