Seòmar agus comataidhean

I certainly think that it is important to keep track of public satisfaction with the process, if that is possible.

My next question might yield the same answer, but I will ask it anyway. We have information that suggests that, last year, only 25 out of a possible 1,151 local authority complaints were closed after the investigation stage. Again, the question arises about why so few local authority complaints are investigated. It is quite a substantial difference. I invite you to explain that, if you can.

Let me pick up on that. As I said, 25 out of 1,151 cases were closed. Can you give the committee and the public an assurance that the other 1,126 have not been dismissed and are being dealt with by someone in a different part of the complaints process?

I will follow up briefly on Marie McNair’s question on dampness and mould. Are you aware of authorities that still regard complaints from tenants about dampness and mould as being about condensation and therefore do not categorise them as dampness and mould? We have had that problem for many years, and some of us who have served in local authorities have experience of it. It appears that dampness and mould was not recognised as a danger that should prevent a council from allocating a house in that condition. I would not like to think that it is still the case that people’s complaints about dampness and mould are being disregarded as being about condensation only. Could you say anything about that and about whether we are gathering such complaints fully and properly now?

Okay. Thanks for that.

That is really helpful, Michael. Thank you very much for that.

George, in your remarks and in response to questions, you made really positive comments about attempts by landlords to control their expected rent rises. You mentioned that several times. Can you flesh that out a wee bit and talk, conversely, about the impact of that initiative and work that they are doing to invest in their stock? Can you add more about the numbers? How many landlords are doing that? Is it widespread? Is it a small number? Can you give the committee a sense of how many landlords are embracing your recommendations?

Tom, are you concerned about any possible behavioural response to the measure in that second home owners might shift their properties into the short-term letting domain, making them liable for non-domestic rates, and thereby potentially not pay anything at all?

Homes being empty is bound to have an impact on landlords’ retrofitting intentions as well, is it not?

Are the public happy with that change in emphasis? Are we tracking their overall satisfaction with the complaints process?

Okay. May I stick with that for a second? Let us say that 800 complaints were valid in the past and now the number is 192. Where do the others go? Are those complaints being pushed back to the public body—a local authority, for example? Members of public who make complaints to the ombudsman often think of the ombudsman as being their last port of call. They say, “We have to go to the ombudsman.” Do you write to those complainers to say, “We’re not dealing with that. We think it’s better dealt with locally by the public body or the council.”? If so, what message does that give to members of the public who want to use the ombudsman as an independent arbiter on some of those issues?

Good morning to you both. I will follow up on Pam Gosal’s point. After this item with you guys, we will discuss a paper that tells us that, in Scotland, there are 70,000 long-term empty houses. How does that square with your comments about the systemic failure of some councils to deal with homelessness? How do we have such a huge number of long-term empty houses and such a high number of homeless people in Scotland?