���˿���

There are a number of issues. Callum Chomczuk from CIH talked about the issues that social landlords currently face. I think that he mentioned three elements: the retrofitting agenda, existing repairs and, most important, the affordable housing supply programme.

One of the key things—I have already met the City of Edinburgh Council and Glasgow City Council about this, and I plan to meet as many local authorities as I can in the next months—is to try to understand the individual circumstances. Obviously, the affordable housing supply programme is an important part of delivery, because local authorities have to comply with the new standards to ensure that there is no damp or mould.

As we know, it is a struggle to address the issues around construction inflation, which is around 20 per cent, and interest rates are also causing an issue. Yes, we must increase what we are doing around the affordable housing supply programme—there is no doubt about that—but we need to get a greater understanding of all the local authorities. Certainly, the meetings that I have had with the City of Edinburgh Council and Glasgow City Council in the past week or so have given me a greater understanding, which is important.

On other schemes, other funds are available, including the social housing net zero heat fund, which local authorities can use. It is about getting an understanding of local authorities and exactly where they sit. The affordable housing supply programme is incredibly important, but we need a greater understanding of where each local authority sits, and we need to measure the impact of what they are doing in their individual circumstances.

There are a number of points to make. One is that it depends on where you are in the country. That is an important aspect, and that is why it is important for me to get around as many local authorities as I can. As I said, I had a chat with Glasgow City Council just last week. That council and the City of Edinburgh Council raised that issue. However, it is important to go to authorities in the Highlands, for example, which might have a completely different view in the context of where they are.

One of the key things to know—this might not be known; I suppose that it is about getting the message out there—is that local authorities can make representation as a third party. Therefore, it is about trying to understand how local authorities interact with tenants and residents on that.

Another key thing that I have talked about is the organisations that are out there that can provide support. Annie Wells may know that I was a councillor for 15 years. I interacted with Shelter a number of times on those issues. It was helpful, as was the citizens advice bureau. The other organisation that can help is the Scottish Association of Law Centres. Those organisations were very helpful.

I go back to the point that Callum Chomczuk from CIH made. I suppose that there is more understanding of the issue. One of the key challenges for the Scottish Government, through debt and welfare agencies, and for local authorities is to make sure that the information about support is out there for tenants.

The housing and property chamber is probably less adversarial, but even just saying to somebody that they are going to the First-tier Tribunal would probably put them off. There are previous examples that showed that that did put people off.

For me, it is about trying to ensure that there is a support mechanism for tenants, because as soon as people see the word “tribunal”, they automatically back off. It is about working with the debt and welfare agencies and local authorities to make sure that they get the message out. That is incredibly important. As I said, I knew people who backed off in my 15 years as a councillor. I saw examples of that.

As I said, we are trying to work at that. That is part of the reason why I am trying to go around as many local authorities as possible. I am trying to understand where they sit and what we can do. A one-size-fits-all approach will not suit everybody. We need to understand how we can support the smaller and the more remote local authorities as well as the big ones in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Dundee, Aberdeen and so on.

It was quite important that we saw in some of the feedback that came through that there can be complex issues around damp and mould. There is already guidance out there—a briefing that went out on 1 March was referred to—and that continues. That issue merits further discussion. I think that we heard that from the witnesses this morning. I have meetings with CIH and the regulator coming up, and we will probably discuss that.

At the moment, the tolerable standard sets out what the housing should be. It should be free from damp and mould. Specific definitions can be quite complex, but I think that satisfactory guidance is out there at the moment. Witnesses in this morning’s evidence session were tentative in their answers on that.

Does Naeem Bhatti have anything to add in that regard?

I heard you asking earlier this morning about whether properties in that condition should be let out. Obviously, the answer to that should be no. One of the issues that I have taken away from that is the question of where legally we sit on that. I can come back to the committee on that. I think that we have heard about the moral aspect. Should such a property be let out? The answer is no, but I want to take that issue away and check the legality of where we sit and the powers that we have in that regard. I can certainly come back to the committee on that.

Does Naeem Bhatti have anything to add?

At the moment, social landlords have to set out repair timelines in their repairs policy, under the categories of emergency, urgent and routine. You would think that serious cases of damp and mould would be classed as emergency or, certainly, urgent repairs. Tenants in the social sector already have a right to repair scheme, so repairs can be carried out. As part of that scheme, tenants can be entitled to compensation. This morning, the SPSO talked about compensation and reimbursement. The key difference is that damp and mould in a house can impact carpets, wallpaper and curtains, so that issue needs to be picked up.

Part of the discussion this morning was about setting timelines and having a timely response. I will probably investigate that issue further when I meet the regulator and the CIH, because it needs more investigation. As the CIH highlighted this morning, setting out timelines could hold things back, so there needs to be further discussion on the definition of a timely response. The CIH made that point today, and I will certainly discuss it.

The sector is already trying to set out its own guidance—indeed, it did so in February—so it is trying to get ahead of the game in Scotland in that respect.

When I meet the regulator, the CIH and local authorities over the next few months, a key thing for me will be to understand where they sit and to build up that relationship as housing minister. I think, though, that we are already ahead of the game with that. I note that, this morning, the regulator mentioned her review of the guidelines, and I imagine that that will be part of the discussion that I will have with her later this year.

The regulator sits on its own with regard to that issue and does not report to me. That is a key point. Earlier, the regulator talked about indicators for damp and mould. At the moment, it has the necessary powers. I think that it said that it would publish a review in April 2024. I have a meeting with the regulator relatively shortly, and I will ask for a report when the indicators come in in 2024. It would be worth having a meeting about anything that it brings forward.

One key thing that the regulator mentioned was consulting stakeholders. It could take another month or two for it to review the survey results, but it is incredibly important that it consults stakeholders. I noticed that you talked about Edinburgh earlier. It is important that the regulator speaks to a mix of local authorities, not only to your Edinburghs and your Glasgows. As I mentioned to Annie Wells, the more remote local authorities need to be included, too.

There should not be a one-size-fits-all approach to the issue, and the regulator will pick that up. I imagine that I will meet the regulator soon after that report is published. That is for the regulator to take forward.

I will ask about the role of the third sector and communities and the experience of local organisations, primarily, in terms of your remit. I am interested to hear about the strategic planning board level, but also in the team level. What is their involvement? I will go to Alison MacLeod first. One of the key things that you said in your evidence was:

“We would like to see a strategic shift to embrace community led action”.

How do you get community and third sector involvement in discussions to make them relevant and to make the “strategic shift” that you mention?

That is a really important point to make. Thanks for that.

That is great. I ask David Watson to comment on the wider point. Where would you want to be involved in decision making? Is the work resourced adequately? You touched on that. Perhaps you will talk about DTAS, too.

I will put the same questions to David Watson. You mentioned DTAS; I have worked with it and found it to be a great organisation to work with.