³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

I think that the legal frameworks are different. I had a meeting with the Scottish Association of Landlords this week, and that was one of the issues that came up. The association is doing a lot of work. You are talking about individual owners as well as landlords who own five or 10 properties, so trying to embed that into the system is much more difficult. However, the association is keen to work with us on that particular point, and we will continue to work with it on that. It will provide guidance for its members in relation to that work in conjunction with us, but it becomes more difficult when you are dealing with individual owners. However, as I said, the association is keen to work with us on that and develop it. The private rented sector is a really important sector, but it cannot be exempt from the work that needs to be done, particularly around domestic abuse.

More generally, that work becomes important with regard to joint tenancies. The issues around joint tenancies can be quite difficult—for example, if someone is looking to move away. In the work that we are doing on domestic abuse, we are also talking about the joint tenancies part of things. Again, we are working very closely with the association on that and we discussed that with it during the week. It is developing guidelines and working with us, and it recognises that it needs to address that.

I will bring in Pamela McBride in a second, because I have not done a lot of work on that.

There are probably two ways in which that assessment has been presented and there are two different versions. One is the easy-read one for the public and there is also some more detailed information. It has taken a little bit longer than we thought it would take, so I apologise for that. There is some other information that will come out about that particular point.

One of the key things that Homeless Network Scotland said is that equalities goes all the way through that—we have touched on the issue of equalities in domestic abuse. That will always be the case. As we develop that work over the summer, that must and always will be there.

I will bring Pamela in to talk about the work that has been done on that particular point and what is likely to be done in the next few weeks.

I would be happy to write to the committee about that specific point.

Part of that comes back to community planning, although it is almost outwith the remit of the bill. It is about how local authorities set up their community planning frameworks so that housing and homelessness are included. That could be done through local authorities’ community planning partnerships or a thematic group. The Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee has heard mixed views on that. We can enact legislation, but the way that local authorities and, more broadly, community planning partners take part in the process is important. It feeds into the point about how we tackle the issues, because the closer that the partnership between local authorities and communities is, the easier it will be to make sure that these things work.

I will ask Catriona MacKean to come in on that. I will write to the committee and will speak to the relevant minister about it. You are right in saying that the provisions in the 2021 act need to be in force in order to help us to do what we need to do. Scottish Women’s Aid has also raised that point with us.

Yes. Thank you, convener. It is good to be back. I was previously a member of the committee and I always enjoyed my time here. I think that Mr Balfour is the only member who is left from when we were both here—it is good to see him again.

Good morning, and thank you for the opportunity to speak on the important topic of the Housing (Scotland) Bill. I understand that the committee has agreed with the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee that you will lead on part 5, on the measures for homelessness prevention, and on part 6, but only in so far as it relates to fuel poverty. I will therefore focus only on those measures. I will be happy to pick up the remaining provisions with the LGHP Committee.

As I highlight the key measures of parts 5 and 6 of the bill, I am mindful that the committee has heard from witnesses who, although supportive of the measures in principle, have raised some concerns about their practical implementation. They include concerns about what further engagement there will be with stakeholders, particularly as we look towards the timing of implementation and at resourcing. I will take the opportunity to reassure you by addressing those issues.

On the homelessness prevention duties, although Scotland has some of the strongest rights in the world for people who become homeless, the same cannot be said for people who are at risk of homelessness. The measures in the bill aim to put a renewed focus on homelessness prevention so that individuals and families do not have to experience the trauma and disruption to lives that it causes. We want to help to keep people in their homes where that is possible and appropriate, and, in the longer term, to ensure that there is less pressure on housing supply and public resources.

The measures in the bill have been guided by the principles of the prevention review group, which brought together a wide range of stakeholders including the prevention commission, which is a group of people who have lived or front-line experience of homelessness. The new ask and act measures for relevant bodies are bold and they reach further than similar duties that have been introduced elsewhere in the UK.

The next stage is to work closely with our stakeholders on the details of how the ask and act measures and the changes to existing homelessness legislation for local authorities will work in practice. We will work collaboratively with stakeholders to develop guidance that builds on existing good practice that is already happening; to identify the training that is required to ensure that our workforce has the necessary skills to make the duties a success; and, crucially, to identify the most appropriate timing for implementation of the changes against the landscape of other challenges in housing and elsewhere.

The principles of shared public responsibility, earlier intervention across systems, and more choice and control over housing options through avoiding crises are also at the forefront of our minds with the measures.

We took an evidence-based approach to deliver our best estimates of the costings and resource implications, which are set out in the financial memorandum. In December 2023, working with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, we conducted a survey of local authorities on the potential resource implications of any new duties. The approach built on the ask in the jointly-run Scottish Government and COSLA consultation that ran to April 2022. Although the feedback was limited in the amount of detail that was provided, I recognise that investing resources in early intervention can be effective for people who are at risk of homelessness, as it means that they avoid reaching crisis point and entering the homelessness system, which in turn decreases the demand for temporary accommodation and puts less pressure on resources over the longer term.

Stakeholder feedback and analysis and further work to identify the content of secondary legislation, guidance and training that is required to support the duties will also help to inform the detail of what might be required in future budget-setting processes.

In updating the definition of domestic abuse as it applies in housing legislation, we have taken account of the evidence on the need for a gendered approach. The equality impact assessment, which was published on 21 June, demonstrates that approach. We know that men’s and women’s experiences of homelessness are very different, and our focus on domestic abuse is therefore key, as it is one of the main reasons for women making a homelessness application but might not be the main reason for men doing so. I want to reassure you that the statutory guidance that will be developed to accompany the provisions will also take a gendered approach, and we will highlight the importance of applying a gendered lens to services and policies.

On fuel poverty, we are implementing a minor technical change to the Fuel Poverty (Targets, Definition and Strategy) (Scotland) Act 2019 to deliver a strengthened governance process. Our continuous improvement approach will give officials a more suitable lead-in time for preparing reports; engaging with an extensive range of stakeholders, including our Scottish fuel poverty advisory panel; and undertaking analysis.

The bill is designed to focus our action on supporting the most vulnerable, especially during these challenging times, in order to achieve our shared goal of delivering safe, affordable and quality homes, and the measures will help to deliver on that ambition. I view the measures in the bill as an important next step in delivering on our ambition to end homelessness in Scotland. I and my officials look forward to answering any questions that members might have on those parts of the bill.

There are a number of answers to that. One is that we cannot compel the likes of the DWP and Home Office, but that does not stop us from engaging with them. Anybody who has had the experience of working in the sector and dealing with homelessness knows that the policies of those bodies have an impact on the issue. So, although we cannot compel them, we will continue to work closely with them.

Part of the stakeholder engagement that will take place over the summer will involve discussions about experiences with the DWP and Home Office, for example, and how we can ensure that the relationship between the sector and those bodies is as close as possible. Although we cannot compel the DWP or Home Office to be part of that, we will work closely with them.

That relates to the point that Kevin Stewart made about culture. We need to ensure that those bodies are brought into that culture. Even though we cannot compel them, they are important stakeholders, so we will continue to engage with them regularly as the legislation is developed and then embedded.

There are two ways of looking at this. Again, coming back to my own personal experience of working with a number of cases over a number of years, I think that you can sometimes be too specific. That is something that can be picked up through guidance and training, but it is one of the key points: you can be too specific about how you deal with a specific case, because, as we know, every case is different.

A key thing for me is to make sure that there is co-ordination at local and council level. How do we deal with these cases? How do we deal with, say, health boards? How do we deal with the police? In some circumstances, you can be too specific; indeed, it would be difficult to have something specific on the face of the bill.

Again, we will be guided by what the homelessness prevention and strategy group looks at. There is also a group that measures the effectiveness of that and we will be guided by that, too. Sometimes, we can be too specific. The guidance and culture will be the main aspects, and we are going to be guided by the outcome of the groups that I have mentioned.

Pamela, do you want to add anything on that particular point?

I have a couple of thoughts on that. An outcome group and a task-and-finish group were set up to look at measurements and how we monitor these things, and the issue has also been discussed by the homelessness prevention and strategy group that we referred to at the start of the meeting.

You are right in saying that one of the key things about sharing data is co-ordination and that we also need to be cognisant of data protection. However, when it came to identifying key issues, there were specific task-and-finish groups, and I think that the matter has already been talked about by the homelessness prevention and strategy group.

As a previous member of the committee, I know that we have talked about sharing information on, for example, social security. Data protection is there for proper reasons, but it does make it difficult to share information. I suppose that it will come down to having broader co-ordination right through the process. After all, a person tends not to arrive at homelessness for one specific reason—the situation tends to be more complex than that. Recommendations have come out of the groups that I have mentioned, but we are reviewing what any approach might look like and how much information and data can be shared. With specific cases—I come back to Mr Doris’s question about the co-ordination of complex cases—one of the most difficult issues is how we ensure that the data is shared without breaking any data protection rules. We are trying to ensure that the process is as co-ordinated as possible.

It is a really relevant point. Sometimes it can be difficult to share data if it is not within the data protection legislation, but this is something that has been and will continue to be looked at. I do not know whether Pamela McBride wants to say any more about that.

Crisis has been one of the most important stakeholders all the way through the process. I have regularly engaged with and talked to the organisation and I will continue to do so. We have the bill, but there are also things that we can do now to prepare for implementation of the provisions, so we have been speaking to Crisis about that.

I point out that the Scottish Government and COSLA have the ending homelessness together action plan, which sets out the actions that we will take behind all of this, and the other key thing that I should mention is the prevention review group. Crisis is a main part of that—it has been included in the process from the start—and we will continue to work with it. Plans are already in place. Crisis will inform us as we go through the process, and we will continue discussions with it.

A key point is that we will have the national plan. When it comes down to it, there are 32 different local authorities and almost 32 different solutions. How we deal with the issue in Glasgow will be different from how we deal with it in the Highlands, for example. There is always an individual local government element, which is really important.

We will continue to work closely with Crisis as we move ahead, as we have done throughout the process. It has been an integral part of the prevention review group, and it will be integral in the months and years ahead as we implement the legislation.