���˿���

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.

Maybe more funding is needed for the likes of DTAS, to build capacity. Louise Robb might want to talk about that, before I ask David Watson to respond on the broader point.

I have been focusing on the third sector in the context of community involvement. We have had feedback that the picture is mixed from area to area—we are picking that up today, too. Central to what is coming through is that there needs to be recognition of what communities do and consideration of how they can be adequately resourced.

If the witnesses could take a step back and look at the situation, as the committee is doing, how would you like to interact with your local authorities? What are local authorities not doing that they could be doing? When do you get involved in decision making, and when would you like to get involved? That is the key issue. What funding would you need to do the best job?

I will also ask about the lessons that have been learned from the Covid experience. During Covid, local authorities and local organisations had to turn round and get action plans in place overnight. Are there lessons that we have learned—or not learned? I put that to Louise Robb first.

I am the MSP for East Lothian. Previously, for 15 years, I was a councillor and council leader in East Lothian, and I was a community councillor on Dunbar community council for 10 years.