���˿���

How long will it take to do it? That is not a trick question. I am not trying to catch you out. Will it be one year or two years—what do you think?

This is a hefty group with quite a lot of amendments. I have lodged a number of amendments that deal exclusively with students. I mentioned the cross-party group on housing, which has produced another report, this time on student housing and homelessness. The report followed on from the very powerful presentations that we heard from students and from meetings that I had with students and student organisations. The minister was at at least one of the meetings of the cross-party group and also heard those presentations. The report included some challenging recommendations for Government, which led to my amendments that we are considering today, along with others that were considered by the Social Justice and Social Security Committee.

My strong view is that, if we are to have rent controls, students ought to be covered by that system. I would love to hear from anyone who has a contrary view, and if anyone does, they can intervene on me at any point. The committee correctly identified in its excellent stage 1 report that students have been overlooked by the bill, but we can rectify that quite easily.

I turn to my amendments and others in the group. Section 1 of the bill deals with the designation of rent control areas. Amendment 51 provides a definition of “student residential tenancy”, namely that it is a tenancy where the tenant has

“the right to occupy the let property while the tenant is a student”.

The amendment adds student residential tenancies to the definition of a relevant tenancy so that student tenancies might be considered in the rent control provisions that are contained in the bill.

Amendments 52 to 58 insert the word “student” into various sections of the bill. Amendment 52 says that the report that councils send to ministers recommending that an area be subject to rent controls should also include student tenancies. Amendment 53 provides that student tenancies must be included when a minister makes a decision about designating a rent control area. Amendment 54 includes students in a subsection that makes reference to private residential tenancies, this time for regulations that designate an area as a rent control area. Amendment 55 seeks to explicitly include student tenancies under the type of tenancy that is included in the definition of a rent control measure.

When I close the debate on this group, I will have more to say about this then, but the process has been immensely frustrating. I feel the pain of Mr Greer and Ms Duncan-Glancy. Many of the amendments have been lodged for some time now. I lodged my amendments ages ago, and as soon as I could.

The minister has seen them. If he is hiding behind the review group, it should have seen the amendments—and that applies not only to my amendments but to others. The review group and the minister have had time to consider the amendments. Why has that not been done?

All that work should have happened already, frankly.

That is entirely right. I am clear on what I would do if I was voting, which I am not. I would be trying to get the minister to engage with the matter in a way that he has not done to date. To be honest, it is a pretty extraordinary situation. My position is clear and I have outlined what I think. I had hoped that the minister would have come to committee today to say, “I am not sure about that amendment. Maybe that amendment needs a bit of work and we’ll engage with the review group. I will ensure that ���˿��� can meet the review group, maybe collectively, and that, together, we can agree on some amendments to deal with the issues for stage 3,” but he has not done that. My strong suggestion to the committee members—I cannot really make it any stronger or clearer—is that, if you can bring yourselves to, you should support most of the amendments in the group.

If you just look at the revaluation issue, it is indeed quite absurd, but the bill might not be the place to deal with that. Frankly, Parliament has been playing around with the issue for far too long. I think that it falls into the “too difficult” pile, and that is probably why parties will not deal with it. However, the issue needs to be dealt with, and it is probably one for the next session of Parliament. I am sorry to say that, Mr Greer, but that is the reality.

I hear what the minister is saying—I accept that people can graduate long after finishing their course—but does he accept the general principle of what I am trying to achieve, irrespective of the details?

That is fine. I will get to close the debate on the group, so I can address the minister’s comments then. I have spoken to him, and I will wait to hear what he has to say.

Amendment 60 adds student residential tenancies to the definition of “a relevant tenancy” by repealing paragraph 5 of schedule 1 to the Private Housing (Tenancies) (Scotland) Act 2016. That schedule lists the tenancies that cannot be private residential tenancies, and the list includes a tenancy whose

“purpose ... is to confer on the tenant the right to occupy the let property while the tenant is a student”.

Repealing that paragraph of the 2016 act will promote greater equivalence between private residential tenancies and student residential tenancies.

Amendment 75 provides that the new regulation-making powers under amendment 59, which empowers Scottish ministers to make provisions for student residential tenancies to be subject to rent controls on an equivalent basis to private residential tenancies, are subject to the affirmative procedure. I note that the amendments relate to rent control and rent increases, and not to other aspects of the bill.

I turn to Maggie Chapman’s amendment 535, which deals with guarantors for students who are non-UK domiciled. I have a lot of sympathy with that, not least because I address the issue with an amendment in a later group, and I am keen to hear about it from Ms Chapman when she speaks to her amendments.

I shall close there, convener. I move amendment 51.

I will press amendment 51. At the start of this debate, while members were speaking to their amendments, I wrote down the word “uplifting”—it was uplifting, because we had virtual unity across the board on what people think ought to be achieved. Then, as soon as the minister started to speak, my mood darkened. I was watching the body language of members who are on the committee and those who are not, and there was a lot of head shaking going on, as the minister dug a hole deeper and deeper. He does not appear to have been able to get out of it.

What he seems to be saying—in fact, what he is saying—is that he has not reached a conclusion on many of the amendments in the group. He cannot reach a conclusion, because the PBSA review group has not reached a conclusion on many of the amendments in the group.

I see that Mr Johnson wishes to intervene, and I shall, of course, let him.

I will not address all the amendments in the group, because that might take some time, but I will address my amendment.

You would expect a group of amendments that deals with taxation to be dominated by the Greens, and, sure enough, they have not disappointed. Amendment 74 is my one amendment in the group. Again, it deals with students. It would exempt students from paying council tax until they have graduated. It directly amends the Council Tax (Discounts) (Scotland) Consolidation and Amendment Order 2003. I lodged the amendment after getting representations from students about that very issue. It really is as simple as that, so it is a case of whether members agree or disagree with the amendment. I think that it is worth voting for.

Mr Greer has raised a number of issues. You might consider that this bill is not the place for them, but he has managed to air his views. One calls for a council tax revaluation. We have a system in which property values for council tax purposes are based on 1991 values. That is clearly absurd, but if you were to change that and revalue, there would be winners and losers. As there would be losers, that is, no doubt, why his amendment will not be agreed to today.