Seòmar agus comataidhean

I believe that Professor Fitzpatrick would like to come in on that.

I will let Jeremy back in.

I remind everybody that we are really short of time and that people should keep their questions and answers as succinct and concise as possible, please.

Very quickly, as we are really over time.

I think that Maggie Brunjes would like to come in. Please be brief, Maggie.

Thank you all for joining us today and for your contributions.

Next week, the committee will hear from two more panels of witnesses on the bill. Our witnesses will include stakeholder organisations as well as relevant bodies that will be subject to the bill’s ask and act duty to prevent homelessness.

That concludes our public business for today. The committee will now move into private session to consider the remaining items on the agenda.

Our next item is our first evidence session on the Housing (Scotland) Bill at stage 1. The bill was introduced in Parliament on 26 March 2024 by the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice. The Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee is the lead committee on the bill, but the Social Justice and Social Security Committee has been designated as a secondary committee and will scrutinise part 5 and an element of part 6 of the bill.

Part 5 makes provision about homelessness prevention, including duties of relevant bodies and assessment of housing support services and tenants who are affected by domestic abuse.

Part 6 makes provision about other housing matters, including mobile homes, fuel poverty and disclosure of information to the New Homes Ombudsman Service. The social justice issues that are related to fuel poverty are within the committee’s remit.

Before we begin today’s evidence session, I will mention the lived experience engagement event that Jeremy Balfour and I attended on Monday. The event was facilitated by Crisis, and we had the opportunity to speak with people who have experienced homelessness about what they had gone through, as well as to hear their thoughts on the bill. I am extremely grateful to the participants for giving their time and to Crisis for helping to make that happen. The discussions that we had will be very useful for the committee’s consideration of the bill.

The committee clerks will prepare a note of the key points that came up during the session to place on our website. The note will highlight themes but will not identify anyone. Before that is done, I take this opportunity to put on record some of my thoughts about the session. I will then pass over to Jeremy Balfour to do the same.

We were split into two groups, and the event was facilitated by Crisis and the Parliament’s participation and communities team. The key themes that came out were the circumstances that lead to people becoming homeless, the processes after they became homeless and their contact with organisations such as Shelter, Crisis and local authorities. We touched on the support—or lack of support—that was provided to them, and the difficulties in accessing that. That was a key challenge.

We also touched on how to prevent homelessness and about how organisations can work better together to assist people who are going through that. There were also general comments on the bill. In the group that I was involved in, a particular theme came out about the lack of support for young people, particularly in education, and about who they engage with through that process. People in the group felt that it is key that the bill ensures that stakeholders, such as education services, know more about the homelessness process, and that young people are made more aware of and educated about the process and how they can better get help for themselves. A concern about the lack of provision in the bill for young people came across very strongly. There was also concern about the availability of resources to implement the ask and act duty properly, and about any unintended consequences of the six-month notice period.

One of the bigger issues that came across from all organisations dealing with people who have experience of trauma was the need for increased training. There was uncertainty about how the bill’s provisions would fit together, and they wanted more guidance on that. They also thought that the bill potentially contained contradictions—for example, the aims of the domestic abuse provisions when compared with those on homelessness prevention.

People in the group highlighted the stigma that someone experiences going through the welfare benefits system and their difficulty in even getting private landlords to take them on. For example, it was common for them to see advertisements that said, “No benefit claimants”. When rent increases were made, they were anxious about being able to afford them, which added to their uncertainty.

I will not go into further detail at the moment. The clerks will provide members with notes from the meeting, which will also be available on the committee’s bill web page.

I will now hand over to Jeremy Balfour for his thoughts on the group that he spoke with.

Thanks very much, Annika. I put that question to Professor Fitzpatrick.

Thank you very much, Professor Fitzpatrick. Would John Mills or Maeve McGoldrick like to come in on that?

That is helpful—thank you.

To follow on from that, what benefits might a greater focus on homelessness prevention measures bring to those who are at risk of homelessness, and to public bodies that deal with people who may be at risk of homelessness or who are homeless?

I put that question to John Mills.