Chamber and committees

I am sorry. I did not mean to put words in your mouth. I did not mean to question your position in terms of wanting to see land being well used in Scotland; I did not mean to insinuate otherwise.

What interests me about the public interest test—to go back to the issue that I raised in my first question—is that there is a view, which many people in Scotland hold, that land is not well used at present. I include urban Scotland in that. A public interest test has the potential, as some people have argued in evidence to the committee, to help to ensure better utilisation of land—not just in rural, agricultural and island settings, but in urban settings.

Thank you, convener. In order to help with the understanding that colleagues are seeking, we should also ask the Government whether the consequentials have indeed been passed to it, in what fashion, and whether they are for one financial year or being allocated as part of a longer process. We need to have a full understanding of the situation.

Appreciating the points that the commissioner has just made, I think that it is important to emphasise that international students not only make a contribution to our universities. Many of them stay in Scotland and are huge contributors to our economy and public services.

I have three follow-up questions. First, Professor Gillespie mentioned a 20 per cent reduction in the number of international students. Can you explain in general terms the causal factors for that reduction?

Secondly, there was some mention of the NHS surcharge. My understanding is that that policy decision is fully reserved under immigration policy. Healthcare itself might be devolved, but the Scottish Government cannot influence the NHS surcharge through devolved powers.

I have a third question, convener.

Lastly, you talked about further co-ordination to promote brand Scotland. My understanding is that, through the Scottish Government external affairs division and its various connections, significant work is already going on to promote brand Scotland, and our university offer as part of that. Are you acknowledging that? Are you saying that that kind of work could be enhanced and developed, but that we are already in a healthy place?

It would be helpful if you could clarify those three areas.

Within the scope of the bill, could the public interest test make a meaningful difference in urban Scotland?

In your submission and in wider work, you have noted several detailed issues with the provisions on rent reviews. Will you expand on those?

Thank you.

Good morning, all. I want to go back to the considerations around a public interest test. I represent the most densely populated part of urban Scotland, and this point applies to all of urban Scotland in the housing emergency that we face. In many instances, the cost of land is a real prohibitor of social landlords building more housing, and the land banking of areas of our cities is a problem. Measures that have made an impact have been taken but there is still work to do. I know that you have produced papers on a public-interest-led approach to development. Will you say a bit more about how a public interest test could make a difference in an urban context as well as a rural one?

In relation to part 2, you indicated that you supported efforts to give confidence and certainty to the tenanted sector. However, you drew attention to the continued decline in tenanted land—which you mentioned a few moments ago—and the risks of disincentivising letting land in the future.

Will you say a bit more about whether the bill strikes the right balance between supporting tenants and incentivising letting land? Are any additional changes needed to ensure the right balance is struck over and above what you said a few moments ago?