Chamber and committees

John McKenzie, the regional secretary of the Fire Brigades Union Scotland, said that failure to make meaningful progress in removing the cladding more than six years on is “reprehensible” and shows

“complacency to the point of contempt for those living, working and being educated in buildings wrapped in these materials, and for the firefighters who would be called to rescue occupiers and extinguish cladding fires.”

What is your view on the possible inclusion in the bill of timescales for delivery of cladding remediation, and how might that work in practice, given the various technical and industry factors that could delay such work?

Good morning, panel. Last week, witnesses expressed the need to rapidly get to a place where everyone agrees, including banks and insurers. However, we have heard concerns that, because all the work in a building will need to be completed before it can be included on the cladding assurance register, there is a risk that more substantial cladding remediation works may be completed, but a building will still not be declared safe if other works remain outstanding. Would completion of the substantial remediation works be enough for insurers to be comfortable with insuring a building?

I put the question to Mervyn Skeet first.

A previous witness, in their written submission, raised concerns about the appropriate balance of responsibility for funding remediation work. The Law Society of Scotland expressed concerns that the bill will place commercial pressure on developers to fund remedial works without building a coherent legal framework for distributing costs between all relevant parties. Can you expand on that and say what sort of implications the bill would have for developers and the remediation programme more broadly to proceed without a coherent legal framework?

My question is for Jim, so that is okay.

Does anyone else have a comment?

Good morning. I am a member of the Scottish Parliament for West Scotland.

No; that is fine. I will go on to question 4 because my first question has been answered. Thank you.

Have you brought up the threshold issue with the Scottish Government?

Good morning. My question is for Fionna Kell from Homes for Scotland, but others are welcome to contribute.

In your submission, you warn that the failure to mention the proportionate treatment of SMEs in the bill could force many out of business and result in significant losses of the social and economic contribution that they make at local and national level. Will you expand on the effect that the bill could have on SMEs? What impact will it have on house building if many SMEs are forced to close?

Good morning, panel members. One of my constituents owns a buy-to-let property in a building that was included in the post-Grenfell pilot programme run by the Scottish Government to reclad buildings. Although the factor has been proactive in engaging with residents, the developer has not been co-operative. The impact of that is that numerous flats in the block have been repossessed, pushing the insurance cover for the building sky-high, and residents and landlords are unable to sell their properties, because new mortgages will not be issued to potential buyers due to the on-going cladding issue. Will the establishment of a cladding assurance register assist in resolving issues with acquiring building insurance or a mortgage for affected structures?