���˿���

The point that I made about the amendment’s drafting was that the issue is how difficult it is to define rough sleeping. I have already agreed to engage further with Mr Halcro Johnston on that point, and I am happy to pick up the issue after today’s meeting. There are drafting issues, as we discussed at the meeting that we had, but I am happy to pick those up.

Mr Balfour, you will be aware of the discussions that are being had. At this stage, we think that that aspect should be dealt with in statutory guidance, but we can discuss that. You mentioned discussions in the future; as I have said, I think that this aspect should be addressed in statutory guidance, but I appreciate your point, and I am happy to pick it up in further discussions.

Amendment 1089, in the name of Katy Clark, would require social landlords, as part of their domestic abuse policy, to consider writing off a tenant’s rent arrears in whole or in part, where those rent arrears have arisen due to domestic abuse. The bill already contains provisions in sections 44 and 45 for social landlords to take action to support tenants with rent arrears arising from domestic abuse. Section 44 creates a pre-action requirement for social landlords to take such action as they consider to be reasonable to support the tenant in those circumstances, having regard to their domestic abuse policy.

Section 45 requires social landlords to have a domestic abuse policy that includes a description of the action that must be taken in relation to the needs of a tenant in such circumstances. Scottish ministers can specify additional pre-action requirements via regulations, which would offer the opportunity to consult social landlords on the proposal. We agree that we can go further with this amendment, but there are some drafting issues with it, and I ask the member to work with me on the matter before stage 3.

Amendment 1024, in the name of Jeremy Balfour, would require a court to delay a social landlord’s right to recover possession by one year and landlords and tenants to agree a reasonable payment plan for future and outstanding rents. Existing statutory provisions already require all social landlords and tenants to make all reasonable efforts to agree a payment plan for future and outstanding rents, and social landlords cannot raise eviction proceedings for rent arrears in court unless those existing statutory provisions have been complied with.

Delaying eviction by one year where domestic abuse is a factor in rent arrears would represent a significant interference in landlords’ property rights. The amendment proposes a blanket ban on eviction for one year, but provisions already in the bill will require the court to consider a delay to the enforcement of eviction in every rent arrears case. Where the court decides that a delay to the enforcement of eviction is appropriate, it will have discretion to determine the length of the delay according to the circumstances of the individual case. Amendment 1024 could be seen as a significant interference in the rights of landlords under amendment 1 of protocol 1 of the European convention on human rights, and it is not clear whether such interference would be proportionate to the aim. I believe that further consultation would be required on that.

I will address that point in a second.

On amendment 1065, I will be happy to ask my officials to engage with community planning partnerships about their future inclusion.

At a previous meeting, we discussed engaging before stage 3, so I am happy to pick up on the point that you have raised, Ms Boyack.

On amendment 1001, I recognise the role that higher and further education bodies may play in supporting their students, but I suggest that more consultation is required with both sectors, as Scottish universities have said. Scottish Government officials are already engaging with officers from Universities Scotland and Colleges Scotland, and I ask Mr Simpson to take part in further discussions with the sector before stage 3—as we will be doing—if he can, so that we can potentially work on including the sector at a future date. I am happy to discuss that further with the member.

I acknowledge the issues that Jeremy Balfour and Sarah Boyack have raised. As we all know, this is a complex issue across all areas of Government. I am happy to continue the discussions of those points with Ms Boyack and Mr Balfour.

Amendment 1041 agreed to.

Amendments 1042 and 1043 moved—[Paul McLennan]—and agreed to.

Amendment 1016 moved—[Jeremy Balfour]—and agreed to.

Amendments 1017 and 1064 not moved.

Amendment 1044 moved—[Paul McLennan]—and agreed to.

Amendments 1018, 1095 and 1019 not moved.

Amendment 1045 moved—[Paul McLennan]—and agreed to.

Amendments 1079, 1010 and 1020 not moved.

In the discussion that we had, I said that the Government would be happy to further engage with Mr Halcro Johnston on that particular point. It is difficult to look further ahead to where Mr Halcro Johnston might want to go with his amendment. At the moment, I am highlighting the actions that the Government has taken on the matter.

Do you want to come back in, Mr Halcro Johnston?

I know that Mr Doris has raised that issue on a number of occasions. There have been discussions with the DWP, as he mentioned, about the best way to progress this. I am happy to engage with Mr Doris before stage 3 about the best way to achieve the aims that he mentioned, which are very relevant, if he is willing to take up that offer.

Amendment 1061 would oblige a relevant body to ask whether a person is homeless or threatened with homelessness as a result of abuse, while amendments 1063 and 1064 refer to support services for those who are homeless or threatened with homelessness as a result of experiencing abuse. Although I believe that those proposals are already catered for in the bill and in the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987, I know, having met Katy Clark, that we both want the bill to be as strong as it can be to protect women who have experienced or are experiencing domestic abuse. We can do more in that area. There are some issues with the proposed amendments, though, and I ask the member to work with me before stage 3 on alternative ones.

Amendment 1088, also in the name of Katy Clark, would require Scottish ministers to conduct, within one year of royal assent, a review of emergency temporary housing provided to women fleeing domestic abuse. The amendment reflects a recommendation in the “Improving housing outcomes for women and children experiencing domestic abuse” report that the Scottish Government commissioned and whose 27 recommendations the Government accepted in principle.

However, it is important to note that the provision of emergency temporary accommodation, including women’s refuges, is the responsibility of local authorities and their commissioning services. Our overall aim with the duty on social landlords to have a domestic abuse policy is to keep victims of domestic abuse in their own homes and to remove the perpetrator, if that is what the victim wants. The use of emergency temporary accommodation would be a last resort to be used when there are no other housing options available.

The statutory guidance accompanying the duty on social landlords will be crucial in outlining what we expect social landlords’ policies to look like, and the issues that amendment 1088 seeks to address can be addressed in it. The guidance will be developed with the sectors dealing with housing and violence against women and girls, including Scottish Women’s Aid, and I am happy to engage with Katy Clark as the guidance is developed.

Amendment 1022 would amend the definition of “abuse” being added to the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987 specifically to include controlling, coercive and degrading behaviour, including sexual violence. We believe that the definition in the bill is sufficiently broad to capture all those behaviours. We understand Ms Chapman’s desire to protect those who are experiencing abuse by other family members, and we are sympathetic to her proposal, but our focus in part 5 of the bill is on better supporting tenants who are affected by domestic abuse, in line with the recommendations in “Improving housing outcomes for women and children experiencing domestic abuse”.

Katy Clark’s amendment 1062 is also about ensuring that the definition of “abuse” that relates to her other amendments aligns with what we are already proposing in the bill in relation to the definition of “domestic abuse”. We recognise the need for clarity in the 1987 act, but we have already provided for the definition of “abuse” that is being added to the 1987 act to apply to the whole of part 2 of the act. We have introduced provisions in the bill to update the definition of “domestic abuse” in line with the Domestic Abuse (Protection) (Scotland) Act 2021, and our current definition of “abuse” is wide enough to capture the behaviours that give rise, or which are likely to give rise, to physical or mental harm, fear, alarm or distress. Again, we are engaging on this with those in the sector, including Scottish Women’s Aid.

Amendment 1023, in the name of Jeremy Balfour, is designed to ensure that tenants are directed to legal advice as part of the pre-action requirements for social tenancies for rent arrears that arise from domestic abuse. There are already plans to revise existing statutory guidance for pre-action requirements to reflect the bill’s domestic abuse-related provisions, and we will include the details of organisations that provide legal advice on family law.

I fully recognise the importance of continuing to improve the energy efficiency of our existing housing stock, including rural properties. Section 6 of the Fuel Poverty (Targets, Definition and Strategy) (Scotland) Act 2019 already requires the strategy to take account of support for fuel-poor residential buildings, which captures dwellings in rural and island communities. Amendment 1050 would not change that and is not required.

Furthermore, our fuel poverty definition accounts for the additional costs that are associated with living in remote and island communities. The legislation provides for uplifts to be applied to the minimum income standard for households in those areas. We presently support households across the length and breadth of Scotland through the warmer homes Scotland scheme and area-based schemes, which are our long-standing energy efficiency delivery programmes. I am satisfied that our current offer of support to households already broadly covers what is proposed in Ms Hamilton’s amendment 1050. Accordingly, I ask her not to press it. If it is pressed, I ask committee members not to support it. As Ms Hamilton and I have discussed, I am happy to engage with her further in respect of the support that is presently available.

My amendment 1051 clarifies that the proposed changes to the periodic reporting timescale will not apply to the first fuel poverty periodic report, which is due by the end of this financial year. I ask members to support the amendment when the time comes.

Section 42 does not specify “students” but looks at everyone’s needs. I understand the point that Graham Simpson has made, because we have previously discussed how important it is that local housing strategies include the needs of the student sector. As I have said, I am happy to have further engagement with Mr Simpson on that point.

That is something that we would have to discuss. When we met before, we agreed to meet to discuss that further. Without wishing to pre-empt any further discussions that we or you may have, I am happy to pick up on that point and to have further discussions. I am not going to pre-empt things, however, and say that we would support—