Chamber and committees

Thank you, convener. I was trying to unmute earlier to make a more specific point, but I could not get through.

Is this really about making wellbeing something central? Susan Quinn was talking about schools being assessed on highers and national 5s, but, quite frankly, as a parent—and as a parent of autistic children and young people—I think that a lot of parents are actually more concerned about the wellbeing aspect. Is that something that we should be looking at and giving feedback to the community on?

My question goes back from rural to urban and picks up on some things that were said yesterday. [Interruption.] I am sorry, but my Alexa is going off in the background. I hope that that is not very loud for other people.

North Lanarkshire Council has decided to deal with high-rise tower blocks, because they have residents who are really not keen to live there. Despite building 5,000 affordable homes, it looks as if North Lanarkshire might end up with 1,000 fewer homes. I am not sure whether that issue impacts other local authorities. Do we need to think about creative ways to breathe new life into housing that is not currently attracting residents?

I put on the record that I was a councillor on South Lanarkshire Council until 2021.

We have heard quite a bit, so far, about the challenges, but I would be interested to hear about any areas where the panel feels there has been good progress towards the plans that were set out in “Housing to 2040”, and about any good practice lessons that can be learned from that. In addition, can the panel reflect on how further progress could be achieved in areas where there have been challenges?

We have heard that implementing the “Housing to 2040” vision links to a range of other policy areas, such as energy efficiency and the planning system. We have also heard comments around health and social care, mental health and education, and addressing depopulation with regard to reserved UK policy.

Is anyone able to say any more on how the Scottish Government can look at joining up its policy actions to achieve the “Housing to 2040” vision, and highlight any opportunities to build on good practice or improve in that area?

We know that rent service Scotland and the First-tier Tribunal for Scotland housing and property chamber will consider comparable open-market data before making decisions on the rent increases that can be made. How reliable is that data in allowing rent officers and the tribunal to make those informed decisions?

Although making provision for a profit threshold sounds like a nice, simple solution, perhaps the situation is a lot more nuanced than that and not as straightforward as it might seem.

In evidence, we have heard calls for more detail in the bill on the responsible developers scheme. However, there has been a debate around that. Some say that the bill is too broad and relies too much on secondary legislation, which could come too slowly. Others state that the bill is too narrow and that it should be a framework bill, as long as the secondary legislation follows quickly. What are your reflections on that, minister? Might draft secondary legislation be available during parliamentary consideration of the bill?

It is good to hear you highlighting that, including the point about talking to the developers in the first instance. I know that there have been issues around having to look at making changes to the primary legislation in England. Obviously, we do not want to be in that position.

I thank you for coming along this morning, minister. I thank our other witnesses, too, of course.

There have been some issues with the single building assessment giving only a pass or fail, and lessons have been learned relating to PAS 9980 and intermediate risk. We have heard particular concerns from across all sectors that pass or fail scoring could lead to buildings that are not dangerous to life failing the assessment. What is your response to the calls for the single building assessment to recognise tolerable or medium risk?

When do you expect to have a firmer idea about tolerable risk?