Chamber and committees

Good morning, and thank you for joining us.

I have a couple of questions. First, how would you rate the progress that has been made to date in Scotland on the Government’s single building assessment programme? I would like your views on some of the pitfalls that we have seen and why there has not been a four-nations approach to the issue, which is one of the key things that I am concerned about.

That is helpful. In the detail of the single building assessment, is there a differentiation between what happens in Scotland and in England, and what that might mean? In Scotland, now, we talk about high and low risk. In England, they talk about high, medium and low risk. Everything in Scotland that has any potential risk is classified as high risk.

I am concerned that we are not on the front foot on that work in the first place, and that it could also present another issue for getting the work done: meeting the cost of doing it. Do you have anything to say on that?

I take it that no witness has, locally. What could be done to speed up the delivery of the assessment programme? Measures that were suggested include the establishment of a dynamic purchasing framework to improve timescales. Is there anything else?

In England and Wales, they are specifically included but, in Scotland, they are still permitted to have the cladding on them.

I know that a lot of this is technical, in particular when we are asking about the two systems.

Finally, what data, if any, do you have on what are often referred to as potential “orphan buildings” in Scotland? What exposure do SMEs have to that issue, which could present a significant cost for those companies that they might not be able to meet in the future? Are you aware of any data on that?

I have a few questions further to the theme that Willie Coffey pursued. One of the issues that have been raised with me relates to the new regulations not including schools, hotels, hospitals and, potentially, other high-risk buildings. What are the witnesses’ views on why those have not been included?

Yes—over 11m.

Calum McQueen, do you have knowledge of that?

I welcome the constructive points that the minister has suggested in relation to writing to the committee, but I am still concerned about electric vehicle charging points and, specifically, about the 105 buildings that still have to be surveyed. I looked at the terms of reference for the cladding stakeholder group. I do not believe that its members have a responsibility to take part in Government consultations. The minister might need to take that issue away, have a conversation with them and the Fire and Rescue Service and consider whether he could commit to introducing an amending order to exempt those buildings while they are still to be surveyed.

I support the principle of what the Government is trying to achieve, but I am not sure where direct engagement has taken place on safety with the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service and the stakeholder group on cladding on high-rise buildings. Their knowing about the consultation is one thing, but responding is another, and I do not know whether they did. You suggest that they did not respond.