łÉČËżěĘÖ

Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 22 August 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2341 contributions

|

Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee

Damp and Mould in Social and Private Rented Housing

Meeting date: 2 May 2023

Willie Coffey

Thanks. Carolyn Lochhead, is it possible that houses could be allocated in those conditions in this day and age?

Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee

Damp and Mould in Social and Private Rented Housing

Meeting date: 2 May 2023

Willie Coffey

Before I ask for views on tenants’ rights, the legislative framework and so on, I want to come back to John Kerr and ask a specific question. Do you agree that condensation, dampness and mould are not defined in the tolerable rights standard for a house and that it is, therefore, entirely possible for a council, association or anyone to allocate to a family a house that has condensation, dampness and mould and is not entirely appropriate in this day and age?

Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee

Damp and Mould in Social and Private Rented Housing

Meeting date: 2 May 2023

Willie Coffey

Good morning, everyone. I want to develop a little bit more the theme of blaming tenants for their lifestyle, perhaps with Debbie King to begin with. From 1992, I was a local councillor in Kilmarnock and Loudoun and then in East Ayrshire. Over many years, I dealt with literally hundreds of cases of condensation, dampness and mould, and, by and large, the explanation offered was that it was due to the tenants’ lifestyle. When you compared that with other tenants’ lifestyles, which were absolutely similar, who were not living in houses with condensation, dampness and mould, you began to question that assessment.

Why are we still at that point? The ombudsman in England has warned social landlords to avoid blaming their tenants. Is there still a case to answer in Scotland on that attitude of blaming tenants for the way that they live their life in their own home?

Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee

Damp and Mould in Social and Private Rented Housing

Meeting date: 2 May 2023

Willie Coffey

Thanks very much.

Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee

Damp and Mould in Social and Private Rented Housing

Meeting date: 2 May 2023

Willie Coffey

If no other panel members want to assist with a view on that, I will move on.

Broadly, do tenants fully understand their rights and how to exercise them? Do you think that landlords, by and large, work with their tenants to enable them to exercise those rights fully?

Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee

Damp and Mould in Social and Private Rented Housing

Meeting date: 2 May 2023

Willie Coffey

Do any other witnesses want to offer a view on tenants’ rights and how we can assist tenants to exercise those rights?

Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee

Damp and Mould in Social and Private Rented Housing

Meeting date: 2 May 2023

Willie Coffey

I will turn to the legislative framework that surrounds all this. Before I ask you about tenants’ rights and awareness of their rights, do you agree that condensation, dampness and mould are contained in the definition of a tolerable standard of house and are therefore enshrined in the housing quality standard as a whole? I believe that they are not and that that may be partly responsible for perpetuating the problem. I will turn to Debbie King first. Is there an issue with the legislation, and are condensation and mould contained in the definition of a tolerable standard of house?

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2021/22 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 27 April 2023

Willie Coffey

Who would have ultimately approved that? Was that a senior management or a board decision? Surely the six people who got the bonus were not part of that decision-making process.

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2021/22 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 27 April 2023

Willie Coffey

Do you think that that money is ultimately recoverable? I need to ask that question, and I am sure that the public are asking it. It beggars belief that a bonus could be applied, given that the boats are five years late. What constitutes bonus criteria in any of that to justify the senior managers taking that award?

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2021/22 audit of Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow (Holdings) Limited”

Meeting date: 27 April 2023

Willie Coffey

Auditor General, you mentioned the word “completion”. That was part of whatever shape the KPI framework took. People decided to award themselves a bonus on completion of the hull, which was years late. How on earth can that have been? Why was that not for “successful completion” or “timescaled completion”? Why was that kind of language not part of a bonus award scheme? How could that still be validly paid, even if the completion was years late?