Seòmar agus comataidhean

Item 3 is consideration of new petitions, the first of which is PE1957, on home reports, making surveyors more accountable. It has been lodged by Catherine Donaghy and calls on the Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to ensure that surveyors are legally responsible for the accuracy of information provided in the single survey and to increase the liability on surveyors to pay repair bills where a home report fails to highlight existing faults in the condition of the property.

Catherine has shared her experience of buying a house only to discover that the property had major faults, which had not been highlighted in the home report. She tells us that those faults included a hole in the roof and missing rainwater and gutter systems, none of which had been noted as having a category 3 rating, requiring urgent or immediate repair.

As we do with all new petitions ahead of considering them—as I should have said a moment ago—we invite the Scottish Government to comment on the underlying principles of the petition and to respond. The Scottish Government has stated that it considers the asks of the petition to be inappropriate because the scope of the home report survey is outlined at the beginning of the report and clearly identifies the limitations of the survey, and because members of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors carrying out the single survey and valuation in a home report must be appropriately qualified, carry professional indemnity insurance and have in place a complaints-handling procedure that offers independent third-party recourse to complaints—that is to say, by people such as Catherine Donaghy.

In responding to the Scottish Government’s view, Catherine explains the difficulties that she has experienced in pursuing a complaint with the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors and she has suggested that all home reports should include contact details for the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution.

It is an interesting petition. Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?

The petition, which was lodged by Amber Roberts, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to take action to improve the current housing crisis by merging housing associations and local council housing and by considering introducing a new right-to-buy scheme for council tenants. Amber Roberts suggests that merging housing associations with local council housing could help more council houses to become available and result in more than 76,000 council homes being built by 2034. She has also set out a proposal for a right-to-buy scheme that would allow council tenants who have lived in the property for 10 years or more the opportunity to buy their home.

In responding to the petition, the Scottish Government has stated that its

“approach to the planning and delivery of affordable housing, is focussed on providing the ‘right homes in the right place’.”

It has highlighted that

“Housing associations and councils have a long history of ... working in partnership in the delivery of affordable homes”

and has noted that

“Not all councils build new homes, six local authorities have previously transferred all of their housing stock to housing associations.”

Reference is made to the Scottish Government’s own target of delivering

“110,000 affordable homes by 2032, of which at least 70% will be available for social rent”.

It has highlighted that that would

“exceed the number of homes for social rent suggested within the petition”

and that the target would be delivered “within a shorter timeframe”.

That is a lot of houses to be built in 10 years.

The Scottish Government has also stated that it has no plans to reintroduce the right-to-buy scheme, and it has provided details of the support that is available to assist affordable home ownership. That support includes the low-cost initiative for first-time buyers and the open market shared equity scheme.

Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?

We thank Amber Roberts and regret that there seems to be nothing more of a practical nature that we can do.

That seems a sensible proposition. Are we content with that?

Members indicated agreement.

PE1961, which seeks to make it a specific offence to assault, threaten or abuse a private hire or taxi driver while at work, has been lodged by Edward Grice on behalf of the Scottish Private Hire Association. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to expand the Protection of Workers (Retail and Age-restricted Goods and Services) (Scotland) Act 2021 to include private hire and taxi drivers by creating a specific criminal offence of assaulting, threatening or abusing private hire or taxi drivers while they are engaged in private hire or taxi work and by considering such offences as aggravated when the offence is committed while the driver is enforcing a licensing or operational condition. The SPHA highlights the 2021 act and the creation of a new offence for situations whereby a retail worker is assaulted, threatened or abused while engaged in their work. The SPHA believes that a similar offence is required to protect private hire and taxi drivers while they are at work.

In its response to the petition, the Scottish Government notes that there are a range of common-law and statutory offences to protect everyone, including private hire and taxi drivers, from abuse and violence. Those include the statutory offence of threatening or abusive behaviour, as well as common-law offences of assault and breach of the peace. Do colleagues have any comments or suggestions?

I was struck by the Scottish Government pointing the finger at Daniel Johnson in relation to the development of the 2021 act. I am not quite sure what they thought Mr Johnson’s remedy might be.

Do colleagues have any suggestions as to how we might proceed?

I am happy to write to the organisations that you have suggested, but we would do that instead of taking evidence from the petitioner, at this stage. As you suggested, we would write to the SPSO and the Scottish Government.

Are there any other suggestions, or are members content for us to proceed in that way?

PE1963, which was lodged by Roger Green, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to phase in a ban on meat production in Scotland between 2030 and 2040, to coincide with anticipated changes to future food production and consumption.

Roger Green highlights an initiative being implemented by the United Nations and the World Health Organization to reach a global plant-based diet. He states that Scotland should achieve healthy dietary goals by 2030 to 2040 and, among other dietary priorities, that should include phasing out meat consumption.

The SPICe briefing provides detailed information on various aspects of meat production, including the economic impacts, the proportion of meat eaters in the UK and the environmental impacts. The briefing states that 70 per cent of people in the UK are meat eaters and the total agricultural workforce in Scotland is around 67,400 people. It also points to the UK Climate Change Committee’s recommendation to introduce policies to encourage consumers to shift their diets and reduce beef, lamb and dairy production by 20 per cent.

The Scottish Government’s response states that its vision is for Scotland to become a global leader in sustainable and regenerative farming and highlights funds to encourage adaptation to climate change in the sector. It confirms that the Scottish Government will continue to work closely with Public Health Scotland, Food Standards Scotland and other agencies on diet, health and climate impacts to inform future policy.

Do members have any comments or suggestions?

Given what we heard from David Strang and Dr Carole Hunter at last week’s meeting, what is the Scottish Government’s reaction to the Scottish Drug Deaths Taskforce’s “Changing Lives” report, which included a comprehensive suite of recommendations? Will the Scottish Government publish a plan for those recommendations? At the end of January it will be six months since the publication of the report. I recognise that there is an implementation group, but what is your reaction to the report and can you summarise how you expect to move forward?

We have strayed a little bit outwith the terms of the petition that the minister is here to discuss.

A final thought has occurred to me in relation to the availability of healthcare staff. In the wider political context, we are discussing the pressures on staffing resources. Are you aware of any data or issues with the availability of staff who can ensure that prescribed medicines are safely delivered to those who are in custody when it is appropriate?