 The next item of business is a statement by Patrick Harvie on the Cost of Living Tenant Protection Scotland Act 2020. The minister will take questions at the end of his statement and, therefore, there should be no interventions or interruptions. I call on Patrick Harvie, Minister, for around 10 minutes, please. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to be able to make a statement today to Parliament to accompany publication of the first of the Scottish Government's three-monthly reports on the Cost of Living Tenant Protection Scotland Act 2020, covering the period 28 October to 31 December 2022. Parliament, of course, will recall that we took emergency legislative action in October last year to provide critical time-limited protection for people who rent their homes. People renting have, on average, lower household incomes, higher levels of poverty and are more vulnerable to economic shocks. 63 per cent of social rented households and 40 per cent of private rented households don't have enough savings to cover even a month of income at the poverty line. That's compared to 24 per cent of households buying with a mortgage and 9 per cent of households who own outright. With this context in mind, the act had three key aims—to protect tenants by stabilising their housing costs through the rent freeze, to reduce the impact of evictions and homelessness through a moratorium on evictions, and to avoid tenants being evicted from the rented sector by a landlord wanting to raise rents between tenancies during the temporary measures and to reduce unlawful evictions. The provisions are in place until 31 March, and Scottish ministers can, with the approval of Parliament, extend for two further six-month periods should circumstances and evidence show that to be necessary. All of us continue to hear the evidence from our constituents across the country on the unprecedented challenges being faced by people across Scotland due to the on-going cost of living crisis. This unprecedented economic position has not yet changed fundamentally, and I know that many households on low and modest incomes continue to struggle. People are facing increased costs across the board, and the biggest impact is felt by those on the lowest incomes. The Office for National Statistics estimated that inflation for low-income households was 11.9 per cent in October 2022, leaving very many people struggling to cope. The current economic situation is a key part of our on-going review of the emergency cost of living act. Similar to the approach that we took to the coronavirus emergency legislation, we committed to reviewing and reporting on the on-going necessity and proportionality of the provisions within the act. Parliament will recall that during the passage of the bill in Parliament in recognition of the distinctive ways in which the rent cap provisions impacted on social rented sector landlords in particular, the Government brought forward a stage 3 amendment that committed to setting out our intention for the rent cap provisions within the social sector beyond 31 March, doing so within this first report and by no later than 14 January. That is where I want to start today. I have been clear from the outset that I wanted to work with the social rented sector to seek an agreed way forward as an alternative to continuation of the rent cap beyond March 2023. Parliament will be aware that we have been working closely with a range of social rented sector organisations, including COSLA, the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations and Glasgow and West of Scotland forum of housing associations through a task and finish group. Statements of intent were published late last year by COSLA confirming local authorities' commitment to keeping rent increases in April this year to an average of no more than £5 a week and by the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations, who reported that their members are consulting with tenants on a set of increases in April that will average 6.1 per cent. While I anticipate that many rents will be increased at a level well below those figures, the agreement to set out average figures rather than a fixed cap allows for flexibility for social landlords to respond to the consultations with their tenants, which are part of their statutory responsibilities as landlords. There may be some social sector landlords who will for specific reasons have to go beyond this level, for example to allow for planned improvements or maintenance to proceed as agreed through tenant engagement. That will allow for the statutory tenant consultations currently taking place to be taken properly into account for housing associations business plans and for local authorities housing revenue account plans. No social landlord is consulting on a rent increase at or above CPI inflation, which was 11.1 per cent at the time of the data being collected. In light of the voluntary agreements that have been reached across the social sector, I can confirm that we will now bring forward legislation to expire the social rented sector cap provisions from March 2023. Having set out the position on social sector rents, I want to turn now to the position as it affects the other parts of the emergency act and other parts of the rented sector. The report that we published today sets out that Scottish ministers have undertaken a review of the provisions of part 1 of the act in order to consider whether those provisions remain necessary and proportionate in connection with the cost of living. That first report both considers the status of measures through to 31 December, the initial period of the legislation, and alludes to what factors might be taken into account post 31 March to determine the on-going necessity of those measures, which will be subject to separate parliamentary processes later this month. At the end of this first reporting period, it is clear that the unprecedented economic challenges are continuing to impact acutely on those who rent their home. Therefore, having considered the outcome of the review, Scottish ministers are satisfied that the status of the part 1 provisions in the act is appropriate at the end of this reporting period. That will be kept under review going forward. On the next issue, the Scottish Government is committed to expiring or suspending specific provisions as they are no longer necessary. Emerging evidence on the cost crisis makes it likely at present that some of the provisions of the act will be required after the current expiry date of 31 March. For example, in order to continue to reduce the impacts of eviction and homelessness on tenants in both the social and private rented sectors, it would appear crucial that the current moratorium on evictions continues, with, of course, the safeguards that were put in place last October. In addition, the chamber will be aware of the distinct differences between how the social and private rented sectors operate. Clearly, there are still economic challenges facing private renters and there is not the opportunity to agree a collective voluntary approach in the private rented sector, given the very different nature of the sectors. I would anticipate that it will remain necessary and proportionate to extend the rent cap provisions beyond 31 March in the private rented sector, while recognising that the act gives power to vary what the cap actually is. Our consideration of the rent cap in relation to student accommodation is also being considered, particularly in light of the evidence showing that it is having a very limited impact due, again, to the different way in which such tenancies are managed. I hope to be able to set out our intentions on this very soon. These are all matters that we will continue to weigh up and bring back to Parliament soon with specific proposals based on the most up-to-date evidence available. The decision on whether to extend is, of course, for the whole Parliament to make, and we look forward to hearing the outcome of the future consideration of these matters. As required by section 9 of the act, Scottish ministers have conducted a review of the provisions in part 1 of the cost of living tenant protection Scotland act and have prepared this report. We are satisfied that the status of the provisions set out in part 1 of the act, as at 31 December, remain appropriate. We have also undertaken a review of the associated SSIs. Scottish ministers are also satisfied that the status of those SSIs at the end of the reporting period is appropriate. The provisions that we report on today are one part of Scotland's on-going response to the cost of living crisis. The Government will continue to do our duty to report and to be held accountable to Parliament for the use of those powers. We welcome the opportunity of engagement with Parliament and MSPs as this first report is considered. The minister will now take questions on the issues raised in his statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes, after which we will need to move on to the next item of business. As ever, I would be grateful if members were wishing to ask a question, we would press the request and speak buttons now, or as soon as possible, when I call Miles Briggs. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. From that statement, it is clear that the SNP Green Labour emergency rent legislation is rapidly becoming an unmitigated disaster. Scottish Conservatives warned MSPs about the impact on the destabilisation of both the social and private housing sectors, but ministers pressed ahead anyway. Social rented sector, I very much welcome now, has been removed from this, but the damage has already been done. What does that mean for people in the social rented sector? Will they likely now, instead of seeing an average rent increase of 6.1 per cent, that could be an increase of up to 11.1 per cent? The Government is driving rents up at the same time. It says that it wants to do something. Today, what has been given by the minister for the private rented sector, they are in the dark over what is their future. Can I ask the minister two very simple questions? What assessment have ministers now actually made on the impact that this legislation is having on private rented properties not coming to market? Here in the capital, that is driving the housing crisis and will get worse as autumn approaches and student housing especially changes. Given the very same pressures that the minister says that he has listened to and taken on board with regard to the social rented sector, those apply to the private sector. The minister should understand that. Why this cap and why continuous ministerial powers over the private rented sector will not negatively impact on a number of homes and rents and people renting and able to find an affordable property? I am sorry that Miles Briggs did not appear to listen to part of the statement. I made it clear that in the social rented sector, for the COSLA and for the SFHA position, we are looking at an increase that will be on average £5 a week or 6.1 per cent for those two parts of the social rented sector. Given the concerns that were expressed by members across the chamber about the need to balance protection for tenants with the protection for social housing providers to be able to invest in the quality of homes in maintenance, in supply and in the wider services that they provide, I would have hoped that there was a strong welcome for the fact that we have reached an agreed way forward with the social rented sector, but that does not seem to be the case in relation to Mr Briggs. He describes that as a disaster. What I think would have been a disaster would have been if Parliament had not taken the action that we proposed and that tenants, particularly in the private rented sector, who had been landed with 10, 20, 30 or even 40 per cent rent increases, were continuing to be exposed to that kind of practice. That is still happening south of the border. It is not happening as a result of the actions that we have taken. Some of the other questions that Mr Briggs raises are about, either the measures will bring forward later in this month in relation to the future of the cap for the PRS or, indeed, the longer-term work that we are doing to reform the rented sector. I would again express that it may be a forlown hope already, but I would express the hope that Mr Briggs will join with other members in recognising that the rented sector does need continued attention, continued legislation to ensure that people's rights, that human right to decent, adequate and secure housing, is met in future in a way that it is not for everybody so far. I draw members' attention to my register of interests as the owner of a private rented property in North Lanarkshire Council area. In November, the minister reiterated that the freeze legislation is temporary and can only be extended for two further six-month periods. We know that landlords are already preparing increases once the freeze ends and the ONS said that private rent increases were at the highest level since they started collecting date in 2012. The long-promised rent controls need to seamlessly dovetail with the end of the legislation. Can the minister commit to ensuring that the housing bill passes and that the controls are introduced in time for the exploration of the provisions in the bill? Through the moratorium, although the moratorium on eviction continues, our monitoring information shows that the tenant hardship grant fund has only £2.5 million left and 11 councils have spent the entirety of their funds. Can I ask what the Government plans to do to renew that fund so that tenants who are building up arrears through the moratorium eviction do not face a cliff edge with those expires? I thank Mark Griffin for his questions, which raise substantial issues that are of concern to us. We want to ensure that the tenant hardship grant fund is achieving the greatest possible benefit for those who are in need of it. We are actively engaging with local authorities around the guidance on how that can be delivered as effectively as it possibly can be. I hope that we can rely on the support of Labour to achieve that objective. In relation to the longer-term reform, we discussed some of that, of course, during the debates on the bill itself. Labour understands that the emergency legislation needs to be justified in the context of the on-going economic circumstances, the cost of living crisis and the requirement within the legislation for us to continue to assess and report on the necessity and proportionality. If we were not doing that, we would have much more danger of the measures that we are taking being challenged, understandably. We are satisfied for the time being that they remain proportionate and necessary. We will have to keep that under review. That review is why we cannot give an absolute guarantee about what the subsequent decisions will be at later six-month periods. However, the legislation includes the mechanism to reform the adjudication methodology so that we can have a bridge into the longer-term work that will be taken forward later in this Parliament. I thank the minister for his statement and I welcome the decision on the social rented sector. I do not agree with the Conservatives of Assessions on Rent, especially following discussions with my own local authority. Can I ask the minister what discussions were held with COSLA since the introduction of the act and what key issues were raised by them? I thank Mr McClellan for the question. Even before we had the final debates in Parliament on the legislation, we had already begun an active engagement with COSLA, as well as with social housing providers in the housing association field, through that task and finish group that I mentioned in the statement. Many of the issues that were raised by those providers were also raised by parliamentarians, from across all political parties in Parliament. All of us understand that the social rented sector does not exist to make profit. It reinvests rental income for the benefits of tenants in the wider community. It has affordability built into the way that it operates, and it sets rents in a very different way than the private rented sector. The sector wanted us to understand that. We wanted to assure it that we did understand it and take it seriously and that we want to work with it, not just on protecting tenants in the here and now, but investing for the future in adequate supply and, of course, in the transition to net zero, all of which requires them to be able to manage and plan for their investments. I am really pleased that we are able to reach agreement with the sector, and I hope that members across the chamber will be reassured by that. I am genuinely concerned about the potential risk of the lengthening and extension of the private sector. I have nothing to declare interest wise, but I know that quantitative and robust research data from the private rental market shows that agents are telling us that there has been a marked increase in the number of landlords who are either seeking to sell their properties or who will increase rents between tenancies, and that surely will have a knock-on effect on future rentals. Does the minister think that this is only going to get worse as a result of the extension, and what consultation did he actually have with the private rented sector in advance of making today's decision? We have certainly been in regular dialogue with the private rented sector representatives. I have to say that not only landlords and investors, but tenants as well in the private rented sector whose voice is also deserved to be heard. We have maintained that dialogue, but I think that Jamie Greene clearly the Conservatives opposed the principle when we debated the bill of having a rent cap in the private rented sector. They are entitled to that view, but I would point out what has been happening to rents in the private rented sector south of the border in the absence of those measures. Rents have been rising at a faster rate than I think has been seen for a long time. Supply is also deeply challenging, and the concentration of property wealth amongst those who own multiple properties as businesses operate as landlords has more than doubled in 10 or 20 years. The situation in Scotland requires longer-term reform. That is what the Government is committed to doing, but I suggest to Jamie Greene that he should recognise that in the absence of those measures we would be seeing a far more unacceptable position for tenants in Scotland. As part of the regular monitoring of the vital emergency legislation, has the Scottish Government been working with the Rent Service Scotland and the First Tier Tribunal to examine the volume of exceptional rent increase applications by landlords and challenges by tenants? Of course, we have been actively engaged in that. We believe that the number of applications for using the prescribed costs available has been relatively low, but we are continuing to work with the organisations that are part of the landscape and the machinery of delivering that particular form of protection for landlords, given that not all landlords are in the same financial circumstances. We will continue to keep those issues under close consideration as we move forward with the short-term measures and the longer-term work on reform. For as long as tenants have campaigned for a rent freeze, there have been private landlords threatening to sell up in response. Reports of a rise in the number of landlords selling up come as no surprise, but what systems has the Minister put in place to monitor the sales and any subsequent evictions to verify those claims? Let us remember that those landlords who have sold up have been able to do so thanks to the eviction exceptions that this Government included in the legislation. Can the Minister tell us how many of those properties sold has the affordable housing supply programme supported the purchase of to bring those properties into public ownership and remove any need for evictions? I know that the member well understands the reasons why the exceptions were necessary in order to demonstrate that the protection against evictions as a whole could be presented as a defensible at a proportionate measure that this Parliament was capable of passing. I know that that is well understood. I would point out as well that the eviction exceptions do not include simply the desire to make a profit. That is not something that landlords can apply for evictions as an exception to the role at the moment. Absolutely, we need to ensure that, going forward, we are working towards a housing system that is fair, equitable and meets people's human rights to adequate housing. I know that Mercedes-Benz and I share more in common than we have that separates us on the need to achieve that. I hope that we will continue to work together with Labour colleagues as we did during the emergency legislation to try to achieve that. Pitch fees, the equivalent of rents for park home occupiers, are not covered by the legislation. I have constituents who are facing demands for a 14 per cent increase in those fees this year, which, given that they are all older people, most of them are in fixed incomes. It is frankly outrageous. I am aware of the planned consultation on changing the basis for pitch fee increases from RPI to CPI ahead of the forthcoming housing bill. I very much welcome that, but can I ask the minister whether there are any additional short-term measures that the Government might explore to afford people in this situation some degree of protection? I thank Graham Day for raising the issue that he has done previously. Of course, the Government's wider support to people in terms of the cost of living response goes far beyond simply the measures that were included in the cost of living tenant protection bill. I would encourage Mr Day—I am sure that he already is doing—to refer any of his constituents who have concerns about that to the Government's wider cost of living website to identify forms of support that they may be able to access. However, pitch fees are not private residential tenancies. It would not have been possible or appropriate to include them in this bill when it was passed, but we have accepted the argument that there needs to be a review of that inflation measure, and we will be consulting on that very soon. The minister is right about social housing, but he did not mention mid-market rents with any statements, so I quite like some clarity on that. Kingdom Housing tells me that if the rent cap is applied to that tenure, it will reduce the number of MMR properties that they are able to develop. Hillcrests say exactly the same. I have written to the ministers several times, and they have been kind enough to reply several times, but I have to say that I am done the wiserest to what the policy is. Can he clear up what is happening to mid-market rent? I thank Willie Rennie for that question. There is a substantive issue. Mid-market rent is rented out as private residential tenancies. They are not falling within the social rented sector part of the legislation. They are private residential tenancies and therefore will be treated in that way. However, it is important to mention that, whether it is a social landlord looking to provide new homes or any other developer looking to provide new homes, the emergency legislation affects in-tenancy rent increases. It does not affect the rent setting for new homes. Given that it can only be in operation for a further two-six-month periods after the initial period, no developer who is looking to provide new homes should consider that as a barrier to setting rents in the first instance for new homes. It is about the setting of rents within tenancies, rent increases within tenancies, which in any case can only take place once a year. It should have marginal to no impact on any developer looking to decide how much investment they are putting into the provision of new homes. The minister has highlighted the decisive action taken by the Scottish Government to protect tenants through the harshest months of the cost of living crisis. The swift response sits in the context of a firm commitment to introduce long-term rent controls action, which no other part of the UK has come close to matching. Can the minister say how that response might flow into that longer-term commitment perhaps by changing the way in which tenants can challenge future rent rises? I am grateful to Ariane Burgess for that question. Yes, it is clear that Scotland is the only part of the UK that has taken the necessary measures. In fact, even when challenged by Plaid Cymru, the Welsh Government decided not to take that bold action and protect tenants in this way. The longer-term rent sector reforms that Ariane Burgess referred to are extremely important to me. We are already working hard to develop those proposals. We need to ensure that there is a bridge between those proposals, between the emergency legislation and that longer-term work. The changes to the rent adjudication methodology, which the emergency act allows us to take forward in future, will achieve that bridge. If we simply return from the rent cap into open market considerations, that could create an extremely damaging cliff edge. The adjustments to the rent adjudication methodology will provide that way forward toward the longer-term work. The Tenant Protection Act is a crucial and ambitious intervention during one of the hardest winters in recent times, but for the long-term sustainability of the rented sector in Scotland, tenants and landlords will be looking towards the upcoming new deal for tenants. Can the minister assure Parliament that work is continuing towards the implementation of a ffader rented housing system? Absolutely, once again, several members have asked this. We remain absolutely committed to bringing forward the new deal for tenants proposals that the Government has already consulted on. I want to place once again on record, as I did during the debates on the bill, my appreciation for the incredible hard work and energy that has been put into this issue from officials from within the Scottish Government, who have had a great deal asked of them to deliver this groundbreaking emergency legislation and to continue work on developing that longer-term legislation. I look forward to being able to introduce that legislation to Parliament and see it scrutinised by members of all parties. Stephen Kerr, to be followed by Bob Dorff. The economic consequence of rent control is probably the least disputed of any economic theory. It drives out private landlords and it drives up homelessness. I'll give you a case in point, and I'd like the minister to respond to this. The University of Glasgow, under the threat of rent controls, the University of Glasgow students were being told last September to postpone your courses. Don't turn up, because of the shrinkage in capacity in the Glasgow rental housing market. So what is being done now by the Scottish Government, by the ministers, to ensure that we don't have an even more severe problem this coming September? I certainly disagree with that analysis and the idea that the serious challenges to student accommodation, which have been experienced for years in Scotland and have been growing south of the border as well. The idea that they relate to either emergency or longer-term work on rent controls in Scotland is simply spurious. There are other European countries with a larger private rented sector than we have by share of the housing stock, which have had rent control systems in place for decades. High quality, affordable, sustainable and secure housing is absolutely affordable. It requires further reform. The last thing that I would say to Mr Kerr is that the one thing that is least disputable about this is that, if we had not taken action, we would be seeing tenants in Scotland lumbered with the same kind of excessive eye-watering rent increases that they are living with south of the border. I was against enforced rent increases and rent freezes in the social rented sector. I welcome this will not happen and acknowledge statements from housing associations that rent will not go up by inflation at around 11 per cent but rather by an average of 6.1 per cent. That would be an average £3 a week increase on average and secure £170 million to invest in the sector. However, can I ask how the Scottish Government will monitor how housing associations implement after what is an average increase of 6.1 per cent given? Some tenants could potentially face a far more significant increase. We will be actively engaging with the whole of the social rented sector, both housing associations and local authorities, to monitor the implementation of that and to understand the impact on tenants. However, Mr Doris is right that the agreement that we have reached means that the average rent increases will be low and we are all aware of the distinct nature of the social housing sector and its hugely important value to communities right across Scotland. That concludes this item of business. With apologies for the member, I was not able to call or be a brief pause before we move on to the next item of business.