Seòmar agus comataidhean

The bill allows for a licence to use more than two dogs to be obtained under specific circumstances. Rachael Hamilton reminded us that the committee heard evidence last week from Ian Duncan Miller opposing 14-day licences due to the administrative burden that that would cause as multiple licences would be required to cover the full shooting season and would have to be applied for sequentially.

With that in mind, do the witnesses have any concerns that what is intended to be an exceptional licensing arrangement in the bill will be sought as the default and, in effect, create a loophole for hunting with more than two dogs to continue? If we have time, I would like to hear from as many of the witnesses as possible, perhaps beginning with Kirsty Jenkins and Robbie Marsland.

Will the minister explain to us what the EU principles for risk-targeted inspections are and how those are reflected in the proposed new inspection regime?

Good morning. I have a supplementary question that relates to Jim Fairlie’s question about an approach to fox management that involves pre-emptively killing foxes on the basis of a belief or understanding that foxes in general have been known to harm livestock. That is one approach, but another would be to look at specific instances where livestock have been harmed and gather evidence about the cause. If it was found that a fox was responsible, it would be located and killed. Can you share a view on which of those two approaches is the more ethical?

I had a supplementary question, but the moment has passed.

Would you like to give a view on the ethics of either approach?

Apologies, convener—I am just finding my question.

I thank the committee members for their work on the bill so far, and I thank the convener for giving me the opportunity to speak to amendments 66 and 68.

We all recognise that the private rented sector is continuing to grow in Scotland; it now encompasses more than 15 per cent of all households. Those households are now under increasing financial pressure due to above-inflation rent rises. In the past year alone, average monthly rents in Scotland have increased by more than 8 per cent, and that was before the current cost of living crisis and double-digit inflation hit.

As members know from contact from their constituents, the impact of rent costs, coupled with the other financial pressures that are caused by the cost of living crisis, is taking its toll on tenants.

Scotland’s tenants union, Living Rent, has been gathering testimony from tenants about how rent increases are impacting on them, and I will share some of those testimonies with the committee. The first quotation is:

“My landlord increased my rent by £300 with no reason given. We can’t afford to stay and will have to move out.”

Another testimony reads:

“The landlord increased the rent by £100 a month. He said he looked at the average rents for the street and decided he could raise it to £900. It’s had a very big impact on my financial situation, but I feel I cannot afford to move.”

The final testimony that I will share with the committee today reads:

“Our landlord increased our rent by £150 to £850. To explain, he said that he ‘could not be expected to stand still while the market moves on.’ We had to move to a place that doesn’t suit our requirements, as my wife is pregnant and the new flat is very old, has dirty and nicotine-saturated carpets, and is on the top floor.”

That is just a small sample of the testimonies that were submitted to Living Rent. I have more submissions here, if any member would like a copy.

I want to take what the Scottish Government says in good faith. By its own admission, rent pressure zones have not been successful in tackling rip-off rent hikes. I am pleased that, thanks to campaigning by Living Rent members, the Scottish Government has committed to introducing rent controls by 2026. That is welcome progress, but allowing a lead time of up to four years is causing a short-term incentive for landlords to increase their rents prior to rent controls being introduced.

Tenants cannot afford another four years of hikes. That is why I have repeatedly raised in Parliament the proposal that there be an emergency rent freeze. Although the First Minister said that, as a matter of good faith, she will undertake to explore any suggestion that is made in the chamber, the subsequent response that I received from the Minister for Zero Carbon Buildings, Active Travel and Tenants’ Rights did not even address the idea of an emergency rent freeze.

I have lodged amendments 66 and 68 at stage 2 of the Coronavirus (Recovery and Reform) (Scotland) Bill because rents are rising right now, and renters need urgent action right now.

Amendments 66 and 68 would require Scottish ministers to produce, within three months of the bill receiving royal assent, a plan to introduce an emergency rent freeze for all tenancies in Scotland. The rent freeze would have to remain in place until Scottish ministers bring forward their promised legislation in relation to rent control measures.

I hope that the cabinet secretary will engage constructively with amendments 66 and 68, and recognise the importance of standing up for tenants as part of our Covid-19 recovery, because we cannot allow four more years of rent hikes. I also hope that members of the committee will put their constituents first by supporting amendments 66 and 68.

Today, we have the power to legislate in the interests of tenants, and there is no excuse not to do so. Amendments 66 and 68 enjoy the support of tenants, through Scotland’s tenants union, Living Rent, and of workers in every sector, through the Scottish Trades Union Congress.

Let us show people which side we are on and in whose interests we are working by introducing the rent freeze that we so desperately need.

I move amendment 66.

I understand from the cabinet secretary’s comments that the Government supports the principle of controlling rents in Scotland. I am grateful to him for outlining the ways in which amendment 66 could be improved. On that basis, I am happy to seek to withdraw it and to discuss the matter with his office to improve it and bring an amendment back at stage 3.

Amendment 66, by agreement, withdrawn.

I am a member of tenants unions Acorn and Living Rent.

If you had an issue with foxes, for example, would you try other steps before shooting?