 The next item of business is Topical Questions, Question 1, Jackie Baillie. To ask the Scottish Government when the Crown Office was first notified of the allegations of mortgage fraud against Christopher Hales. Lord Advocate As the Crown has made clear on a number of occasions recently, the case of Christopher Hales was first brought to its attention by the Law Society of Scotland at a meeting on 18 December 2014. I thank the Lord Advocate for that response. We understand that the Law Society told the Crown Office informally in December 2014 about the Christopher Hales case, then in April 2015 and then formally in July 2015. Does he believe that there should be an investigation into the process of communication between the Law Society and the Crown Office, given that additional opportunities for alleged mortgage fraud could have arisen due to the delay? Will he order such an inquiry? Can I also ask the Lord Advocate when he instructed the police to investigate and if, as we understand, it was within six days of receiving the report, has he set a deadline for the police to submit a report to the Crown Office, and if that is not the case already, will he consider so doing? Thank you, Presiding Officer. There are a number of questions that have been asked of me firstly with the last question. It is correct to say that, on 3 July 2015, the Police Scotland were instructed to investigate the allegations that were the subject of the Scottish Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. The report was received on that day, considered by Crown Office, and six days later, I think that it was a ninth, that formal instructions were issued to the police. I cannot set a timescale for it because those are complex matters, but what I can say is that the Serious and Organised Crime Division of the Crown Office is in regular contact with both the Law Society and the Police Scotland who are dealing with the matter to monitor progress and to assist in a number of legal matters that have arisen as a result of the investigation. In relation to whether I think that there should be an inquiry or whether I should order an inquiry, firstly I do not have the power to order an inquiry, and secondly I do not think that there should be an inquiry. Let me explain why. Let me just take you through the timeline of interaction between the Crown Office or the Serious and Organised Crime Division of the Crown Office and the Law Society. There are quarterly meetings at which quite a large number of matters are discussed, including issues of whether or not the Law Society will make a referral in relation to a solicitor who has been struck off or is the subject of a disciplinary finding made against him. On 18 December, the Crown Office was first advised of the issue. The Crown Office was advised that the matter was under consideration of a referral to the Crown. The Crown noted the findings of the Scottish Lizards Disciplinary Tribunal and also noted that neither the clients nor the properties involved were named at the meeting. The next time that it was discussed, as you rightly said in your supplementary question, was in April of this year 28th to be precise. Again, the issue was raised and it was noted that it was still under consideration a referral by the Law Society to the Crown. Again, neither the clients nor the properties were intimated at that time. Following those meetings, the Crown was in contact with the Law Society to discuss what needs to be obtained, what evidence needs to be obtained, what files, who has them and a whole host of other matters. I do not think that it would be productive given the fact that there is a live investigation to get into these details. I hope that Jackie Baillie would accept from me that preparatory work was undertaken with the Law Society to deal with the matter if and when there was a formal referral. As indicated, the referral was made on 3 July 2015. We were advised on 1 July 2015 by the Law Society that they required to get authorisation from the Guarantee Fund sub-committee to formally refer the case to the Crown Office. That is a law society procedure. We must understand what we are dealing with here. We are dealing with a criminal investigation at which a person's liberty could be in jeopardy. Those things cannot be dealt with quickly or by word of mouth. There is a process. That process was carried out by the Law Society and authorisation was given for a referral by the Guarantee Fund sub-committee to refer the case. Once that authorisation was given, the referral was made on 3 July 2015. When I say referral, that is a formal referral from the Law Society of Scotland. It contains a whole load of information that the Crown would need. Of course, the Crown has been working or in contact with the Law Society in relation to matters in anticipation of the referral being made. As indicated, the referral was received on 3 July, which is a Friday. It was formally referred to the police or the police were instructed to follow Thursday. The first time that the Crown was made aware of the clients and the properties was on 3 July 2015. The Crown was not aware of the clients and the properties prior to that. There would be issues of client confidentiality and data protection, but that is not my problem or that was not my issue. That is a matter for the Law Society in their dealings with the matter, but I can assure you that I have spoken to the persons at the meeting and I have also had sight of the notes of the meeting. The first time that the Crown was made aware of the identity of the clients and the properties involved was on 3 July 2015. Jackie Baillie I thank the Lord Advocate for that response. The public would probably not understand why it takes more than a year for the disciplinary tribunal to notify the Crown Office. Our concern should always be that vulnerable people in that intervening period could have been caught up and exploited in alleged mortgage fraud. It would appear from press reports that there are not one but three lawyers who have faced disciplinary action by the Law Society. In all cases, there has been one common denominator. Was the Crown Office aware at any stage of those additional cases and had connections been made by the Law Society that were then notified to the Crown? Given the seriousness of the allegations, has the Crown Office taken any steps through the Proceeds of Crime Act to freeze the assets of any of those who might be implicated? The last point in relation to the Proceeds of Crime Act, no, the Crown has not yet taken steps under the Proceeds of Crime legislation. I think that that is premature for that to be done or considered. However, the Crown in any criminal investigation always has, at the forefront, potential Proceeds of Crime Act, but there has to be established criminality before that can be embarked upon. Secondly, in relation to other solicitors who may or may not be involved, I have to be very careful about what I say. What I can tell you is that, in relation to the referral on 3 July 2015, as far as I am aware—I read the referral this morning, and I will check it after those proceedings are concluded—there is only one solicitor that is referred to. However, you have placed me on notice, and I will certainly make inquiries into that matter. In what circumstances would the Crown Office ask Police Scotland to investigate any other person connected with the solicitor subject to the Law Society's judgment? I gave some consideration to that, because I think that it is a highly relevant question. The referral to Police Scotland is in relation to the solicitor who was the subject of the Scottish Solicitor's Disciplinary Tribunal finding. The Police has been instructed to investigate the property transactions relating to that finding, resulting in the solicitor being struck off. Police Scotland has a duty in any criminal investigation to follow the evidence and where that takes them. If, during a police investigation, evidence arises that other persons have been involved in criminality, fraud or whatever crime that the police have uncovered evidence of, then Police Scotland, I have complete faith in them that they will act and do the right thing, as will the Crown Office. 2. Jim Hume Thank you to ask the Scottish Government what its responses to the claim in the report, affordable housing need in Scotland, that the need for affordable housing is double what is being delivered. We will of course consider the findings of the report. We are already delivering a huge boost to affordable housing provision across Scotland by investing over £1.7 billion to build 30,000 affordable homes during the lifetime of this Parliament. That is a significant achievement at a time of cuts to our capital budgets. We want to do more, we want to increase and accelerate our ambitions for Scotland's housing and to continue to do so in an integrated and collaborative way. Our current target of 6,000 affordable homes a year is absolutely not the limit of our ambition and in the last seven years we have delivered 19 per cent more affordable homes than the previous administration. Statistics published this morning also show that provisional local authority capital expenditure in housing has increased by 7.1 per cent from 2013-14 to 2014-15. That is 28 per cent of the total capital expenditure for 2014-15. 2. Jim Hume I thank the minister for that response. She unfortunately mentioned the previous coalition, and I am afraid that the figures are wrong. The start-ups for the year of 2006-07 were over £5,500 in the last year, whereas the start-ups in this last financial year were just over £3,500. However, putting that aside, the report that is published by the three of Scotland's leading housing organisations reassessed the target that is needed to tackle Scotland's house in Trison and is now calling for at least 12,000 affordable homes to be built each year for the next five years. In her consideration, when will the Government be in a position to commit to reassessing its targets and bring them closer to the realistic needs to solve the crisis? As I indicated in my answer, our current target is not the limit of our ambition, and we want to do more. We are working across the sector with stakeholders across the sector to do that. However, I remind the member that, given the falling budgets that the Scottish Government has had, we have built more houses over the past seven years than the previous administration. We know that we need to build more, and we are working hard to do that. He can be assured that housing remains a priority for the Scottish Government. The director of Shelter Scotland said that progress is nowhere near meeting the level on demand. Homes for Scotland says that the housing production is still 40 per cent lower than in 2009, despite a record population and growing number of households. The Scottish Federation of Housing Associations said that, by tackling the housing crisis, there is an opportunity to improve a life chances of Scotland's people, including some of the poorest and most vulnerable. Can the minister then perhaps provide information, in light of those expert opinions, what more it will do to help the most vulnerable to obtain housing? The Scottish Government will work as we have our joint delivery plan to deliver housing in Scotland with all stakeholders in the sector, and the key aim of that plan is to provide more housing and see housing delivered across all tenures in Scotland. We will work to achieve that. Our officials are working tirelessly as well to look at more innovative ways of using the reducing finances that we get from the UK Government to ensure that we can stretch them further. We will continue to build social housing and housing across all tenures. We will continue to do that. It is a priority for this Government. What we have said, we have delivered in the press Parliament and any targets that we set in the future Parliament will deliver. Members will wish to note that I have some time in hand over the whole of the afternoon, so I intend to allow the session to continue to allow many members to have an opportunity to ask questions of the ministers. I also remind members that I truly would appreciate it if you would keep your questions brief. Last week, during Labour's debate on housing, the minister steadfastly refused to accept the description of our housing supply situation in Scotland by the commission on housing and wellbeing as a crisis. Does she accept the figure of 12,000 social houses a year as an accurate assessment of current need in Scotland for social housing? What I said in my initial response is that we will of course consider the findings of this report and look at them very seriously. I also said that a target of 6,000 affordable homes is not our ambition. Our ambition is to build more homes than that of affordable homes and homes for social rent. We will continue to do that. We have delivered 19 per cent more than any other administration and we will continue to work to deliver even more above that. Against the need that is defined in the question, the national housing trust can only be judged as a failure. Will the minister at this point give a commitment to return to the idea of the national housing trust and bring forward alternative proposals for a new vehicle that will facilitate private investment in affordable housing? At this stage, I am certainly not going to give a commitment to something that Alex Johnson has mentioned for the first time that I can recollect and certainly not anything has brought to me before. What I can say to him is that we are working with the sector, with investors, with lenders across the sector to attract private investment into the housing sector, and we continue to do that. We are open, we have had discussions with many groups and many investors and we are willing to listen to any ideas. If Alex Johnson has any idea that he feels that we should be taking forward, I suggest that he brings it to us. What action is the Scottish Government taking to enable local authorities to acquire land for housing at a more reasonable price? Does the minister accept the basic principle that government targets ought to be determined by the level of need that exists? I would say that we are looking at needs and that is why we have our housing needs and demand assessments, because we have to look and local authorities advise us on the demand in their local authority area. Yes, we do look at that demand and we have recently launched—the cabinet secretary launched the planning review, which is looking at the delivery of housing and the infrastructure to ensure that it is not just a process, it is about effective and efficient delivery of the housing programmes that come forward. We are looking at those issues as well. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to ensure that people in Cumnock are not disadvantaged by the decision to close the Cumnock campus of Air College. This news is disappointing. I understand that the decision by Ayrshire College to close the Cumnock campus was due to a fall in student numbers with students choosing to attend the other campuses, including the recently refurbished Air campus. However, the college advised that they will continue to work with its partners and will run short courses at locations across the area to help people to develop employability skills. Looking ahead, the new £53 million campus in Kilmarnock, due to open next year, will provide further opportunities in state-of-the-art facilities for learners across the region. I am grateful to the cabinet secretary for that response. She will understand the difficulties faced by those who live in the Cumnock area. It is a challenged area through unemployment and other past-day upsets. Women's access is an important issue for the Government, and the current announcement has been a great shock to the people of Cumnock, not only in terms of its impact on the economy but particularly in terms of access to opportunity. Will she take any steps to ensure that what can be done for this area will be done in educational terms? It is imperative that the college continues to work with the community to reassure the community and convince the community that, despite the closure of the campus, the college remains committed to learning opportunities in the area. Mr Pearson might be interested to note that the Scottish funding council's outcome agreement guidance sets out expectations that colleges will provide a wide range of FE provision in locations across regions, making it more accessible to students. In my original answer, I stated that the college does indeed intend to work with local partners to identify alternative venues for the two part-time courses that are being offered, and that they will also have to work with the student association to support students through the transition to a new location. Again, thank you for that response. The cabinet secretary will know the expenses incurred in travelling distances for courses. There is that concern in the local area about the additional cost to students. There is also a perception in the area that courses have been transferred to these other campus sites. As a result, the campus at Cumnock has been, to some extent, disadvantaged. At the same time, discussions were on going about creche facilities in Ayrn Cymarnock and the future of those facilities, and they have further concerned local constituents about access to education. I hope that she will take further interest in those matters. Of course, I will continue to take an on-going interest in those matters, and I appreciate the tone and tenor of Mr Pearson's contribution today. He may be interested to note that students who live over two miles from their college are eligible to apply for assistance with travel costs. He also raises the issue of the two nursery closures, the nurseries at the Ayrn and Kilwynning campus. Again, this is a decision for Ayrn College to take. The college states that, despite its endeavours to increase demand for the nurseries, none the less that these nurseries were struggling to break even. Currently, there are 37 children using the facilities to a cost to the college of £400,000. Certainly, I will continue, in my inquiries, along with local members to test the nature of information that comes our way. Does the cabinet secretary understand my concerns about the college's lack of consultation with the local community over the decision? The lack of transparency and openness compares unfairly to, for example, the protocols for school closure proposals. What discussions have there been between the Scottish Government and Ayrshire College? Can she provide reassurance to the community about the impact on the level and quality of college provision for my constituents? I share some of Mr Ingram's concerns. It is important to state firmly that consultation should never be seen as an added extra. It has to be part of the way in which Government and Public Services conduct themselves. I am, of course, aware of the particular challenges that affect the local community of Cumnock, not least, as mentioned by others, its comparative isolation and long-standing high levels of unemployment. I reiterate my disappointment at the decision to Mr Ingram and other members who have an interest in it. We will continue to work together to ensure that the college mitigates any impact. I also say to Mr Ingram that my officials have sought reassurances from the college that plans are in place to continue to support and enable the aspirations of local residents that they have to learn and study. For students currently attending the Cumnock campus, the college is, as I said earlier, identifying an alternative location for delivery with its other local partners.