 The next item of business is a debate on motion 1, 2, 3, 4, 2, in the name of Graham Simpson on housing. May I ask those who wish to speak in this debate to press the request to speak buttons? I call on Graham Simpson to speak to and move the motion for up to eight minutes, please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. It would have been easy today to put down a motion on housing attacking sluggish house building under the SNP. A sector that is flatlining and an obsession with ill-defined affordable housing, whatever that means, would indeed be worthy of this Parliament's time. But there are other issues in housing that also deserve our attention. I want to concentrate today on our current housing stock. Presiding Officer, by 2050, 80 per cent of our current homes will still be in use. In Scotland, a quarter of all domestic dwellings are tenements and 38 per cent of those are pre-1919. According to the Scottish House Condition Survey of 2016, 6 per cent of all properties need extensive repairs, 28 per cent require urgent repairs and 48 per cent have disrepair to critical elements. 5 per cent of pre-1919 properties have critical, urgent and extensive disrepair. Members across the chamber have realised that we need to act. A number of us got together and formed a working group. That's different, Presiding Officer, from a cross-party group. It's a group with work to do. In January, Ben Macpherson led a member's debate on this issue. It was consensual, but of course there was no vote. That's why today we wanted to give Parliament the chance to say that it thinks something should be done. When we talk about tenements, we're talking about buildings in common ownership. It could be any block of flats of any age or one of those four-in-a-block buildings. Because the ownership and the responsibility for them is shared, that's where problems arise. If you live on the ground floor of a four-storey block and the roof needs work, you're not going to be happy to pay, even though it's your roof too. Very often basic maintenance is not carried out, gutters aren't cleaned, checks are not done, so problems mount and so do the bills. Councils have powers to ensure buildings are kept up to scratch, but with one or two exceptions are not using them. We're standing at the condition cliff edge and something has to change and we think that it's inevitable that there will have to be legislative changes. So it is good to see that the Scottish Government agrees there should be a review in their amendment. Indeed, the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations say the issue is one of real concern and that there is no clear legal requirement for tenement flat owners to fund the maintenance and report of common parts. There have been some good ideas. Ricks mooted the idea of having regular health checks on buildings and we agree with them. The Government amendment backs looking at that too. We also think that factors will have to play a part, but this is where we come to the second part of the motion, which is left untouched by the Government amendment and we are backing that amendment. If we're to have mandatory factoring, then we must have a system that ensures that factors perform well and are struck off if they don't. The Property Factors Act of 2011 provides for the performance of factors to be regulated and to comply with a code of conduct. If factors don't measure up, residents can appeal to the housing and property chamber. Since 2013, the tribunal has issued 169 enforcement orders against factoring companies. One in five of those orders has never been complied with. Last week, Kevin Stewart told this Parliament that just two property factors have been removed from the register since 2013. As a result of having failed to comply with the code and with enforcement orders, five factors have been removed for technical reasons. There are a number of factoring firms who are repeat offenders. They've had multiple complaints against them and multiple rulings against them. Apex Property Factor, 13 hearings, 10 rulings against. Charles White Ltd, 23 hearings, 19 rulings against. James Gibb, property management, 17 hearings, 13 rulings against. They're just examples. There is no system in place to flag up repeat offenders. Firms just have to comply with an order and can then carry on as before. That must be wrong if you're very quick. John Mason. I agree with the point that we need to have factors behaving properly because it's useful to have a factor or some kind of organisation looking after a clause. If it's just left to the owners, it's even less likely to happen. Crem Simpson. Yes, I don't disagree with that at all, but we need to make sure that they're operating properly. I don't want to give the impression that this is an industry of rogues because it isn't. The number of tribunal cases is small in relation to the size of the client base and most factors do not get rulings against them when they appear. The Property Managers Association of Scotland told me that the industry generally would benefit from robust action against any firms consistently failing to meet required standards. I'm glad that the Government agrees with us on that. Apex came to my attention when I was asked to help one of their clients. Sophie Wells is a known or occupier in a block of flats in Motherwell. She came to me earlier this year in desperation, so I went to see her and my blood boiled. In 2014, lead flashing was stolen from the building. This has never been replaced. Water leaks into the building and the wood is rotting. Parts of the ceiling are missing. Walls are damp and mouldy, they're green and it's not the colour of the paint. Doors have been kicked in by drug addicts, windows have broken, downpipes are missing, repairs haven't been carried out. In December 2016, the communal areas were without lighting. Residents asked for help from Apex. The lighting wasn't fixed, so Sophie and a neighbour rigged up their own. General complaints relate to invoicing for cleaning and maintenance works that have not been done. Sophie's cleaned the block herself, cut the grass, picked up litter and redecorated inside and out. The main door to the block has also been replaced by Sophie and a neighbour. The intercom system is vandalised and doesn't work. I recently met officials from North Lanarkshire Council. They're not prepared to use the powers they have to get anything done to help the residents. They should be ashamed of themselves. As I said earlier, Apex is one of a number of firms with multiple rulings against them. Let me just tell you about one of the cases heard by the tribunal involving a property in Renfrew. It involved an invoice for repair works. The property owner asked to see the three competitive quotes the Factor had received. Three quotes were provided. Quote 1. Real building contractors. No company address or VAT number. Quote 2. Concept builders. Quote dated after the request for three competitive quotes. The applicant tried to call the telephone number on the quote, but it was not in use. Listed did not exist. The postal address was a mail drop box company. The applicant found the company with the same name, but they denied having provided the quote. Quote 3. Quality property maintenance. No date, no VAT, no address. The landline telephone number turned out to be a branch of a shoe shop at Parkhead Forge. The case goes on to establish various breaches of the code. I've got some suggestions. I'll introduce a rating system for factor companies. There should be a flagging system, there should be better consumer support and it should be possible for applicants to mention things to the tribunal that they've forgotten to put in their complaint form. We need to look after what we have and we need the system to do it. I move the motion in my name. I'll call Kevin Stewart to speak to and move amendment 12342.3 for up to six minutes, please minister. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to have the opportunity to speak this afternoon and welcome the debate that Graham Simpson has brought forward on the important issue of tenement property maintenance. Looking at the amendments from across this chamber, it is clear that we have a lot to agree on. Had Alex Cole Hamilton's amendment been selected, we would certainly have supported it and very much agree that improving the quality of housing stock would support our efforts to eradicate fuel poverty and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Through energy-efficient Scotland, we will encourage and support owners to improve their homes. Likewise, I entirely agree with Andy Wightman's unselected amendment that VATs should be removed for building repairs and improvements. Scottish ministers have spoken on this on numerous occasions and have pressed the UK Government directly. We encourage all parties to join us in calling on the UK Government to make this very sensible change. Pauline McNeill's amendment rightly highlights the various ways open to owners to manage and improve their properties, for example, co-operative arrangements. I encourage owners to work together to put in place the most appropriate mechanism for them. The Under One Roof website is a useful source of impartial advice and information for owners, and we will continue to support it as a Government. I welcome Ben Macpherson's establishment of a working group of MSPs from across the chamber and, of course, interested stakeholders too, to look at ways for owners to better look after tenements. I look forward to hearing this group's findings and particularly about the practical difficulties at enforcement and costs that may be involved for homeowners. I will, of course, give serious consideration to proposals that come out of the group. Alex Cole-Hamilton. I am very grateful to the minister for taking my intervention. Should the proposals coming forth from that cross-party working group include a need for primary legislation, will the Government commit to bringing such legislation forward? Kevin Stewart. We are absolutely committed to keeping our policy frameworks and legislation under review to ensure that everyone lives in a good-quality home. In terms of some of the powers that are already existing and future regulations, actions has been taken already to improve property condition. The 2014 Housing Act allows local authorities to pay and then subsequently recover missing shares of owners who do not contribute to their share of common works. I know that this is a subject that we have touched upon previously in the debate that Ben Macpherson brought forward. I again would say to all local authorities, you have this power, use it to help your citizens. A number of local authorities have already used these powers. The others must follow. There must be the sharing of best practice. I will indeed give way. Daniel Johnson. That is just a point of clarification. The minister may be clarifying which local authorities and how many have used and have not used the legislation that he mentioned. Kevin Stewart. Off of the top of my head, I do not have that answer for Mr Johnson, Presiding Officer, but I am more than willing to provide him with that information. I know that Glasgow is using missing share very well. Aberdeen has recently used it for the first time, and Aberdeen will do much, much more in that regard. I have also committed to extending these missing share powers to registered social landlords and regulations, and that will be introduced later on this year. For owners, we are piloting our £10 million equity loan scheme in Glasgow, Argyll and Bute and Perth and King Ross to fund essential repairs and energy efficiency improvements, including common works. Local authorities should use all the powers at their disposal to tackle poor-quality housing in the private rented sector, including through enhanced enforcement areas, and the power to report breaches of the repairing standard directly to the first-tier tribunal on behalf of tenants. We have already consulted on improving condition standards in the private rented sector, with draft regulations proposed for later this year. I intend to consult on other condition issues, including specific matters affecting tenement properties again later this year. Turning to property factors, through Patricia Ferguson's Property Factor Scotland Act 2011, which received cross-party support, Scotland led the way in having a specific statutory framework to protect homeowners who use the services of property factors. The regulatory regime has been enforced for over five years, and we are considering how that could be strengthened and consulted recently on revised code of conduct for property factors and whether the act has improved the wider regulatory regime. We will shortly publish an analysis of the consultation responses, and we will use that to shape future standards of practice. Presiding Officer, I believe that there is a clear consensus across this chamber and that we can all agree that there is no single quick fix to improve the conditions of Scotland's homes. I very much welcome the debate and the creation of the cross-party supported working group on maintenance of tenement scheme property. I commit to continue working with the sector to review and strengthen policy and legislation so that everyone across Scotland lives in a good-quality home. Thank you very much. Pauline McNeill, up to five minutes please. Presiding Officer, I welcome this debate in the name of Graham Simpson. Tenement properties is a complex subject and one that this Parliament has made significant progress on, but it is also an area of law crying out for more action, for more investment and for more solutions. We are broadly supportive of everything on the table tonight in terms of the motions and amendments, but I will briefly explain our amendment and what it seeks to do. We felt that the Tory motion was reflective of our position, but it appeared to read that mandatory building health checks would be mandatory. We felt that our amendment clarifies that it would be up for consideration rather than mandatory. In order to do that, we had to insert the rest of the amendment to put the bit in at the end about the co-operatives as an alternative to factoring. We will support the green position as well. We would have supported the Liberal Democrat motion had it been selected for debate, and if our motion falls, we will vote for the Government position. That is essentially because we feel that there is a lot of commonality between us. We think that the Government needs to be a bit stronger in giving some commitment to legislation that this Parliament determined. That really is the division between us. The law and management of tenement property is much wider than traditional tenements, as has been said already by Graeme Simpsons. Tenements built in the 19th century where we saw an explosion of those types of buildings are much, much, much wider. The tenement is a fantastic but complex building forum. I am not alone in saying that I have owned three myself in the west end of Glasgow. Dry rock, poor factoring, leaky roofs, unco-operative neighbours all go up with the territory. In many cases, at my surgery too, people are trying to get factors in place. Property is not registered and rented out and owners left with the debt of others. The tenement is a fantastic but complex building forum. I am not alone in saying that I have owned three myself in the west end of Glasgow. Owners left with the debt of others, which have not paid. We welcome the work of the cross-party group in the maintenance of tenement properties. We believe strongly that it will be needed to come up with some real solutions in this parliamentary session. Existing provisions are inadequate in our view for dealing with the extent of Scotland's tenement housing. In particular, we welcome the discussion on owners' associations which currently have no legal status, but it is worth exploring what else they can do if they had the teeth to do it. Housing associations are already playing a vital role in preserving and improving tenements that were in serious disrepair. Some social landlords are selectively selling flats where they are the minority owner as they struggle to meet the housing quality standard. A rapid rise in the number of private landlords, growth and property values which lead to owners becoming property rich but income poor is a key problem in this area. Owners failing to address maintenance and passing it on to the next owner is a huge problem and one that is not missed by members. It would be unfair to think of schemes that would effectively penalise the current owner when the maintenance and repairs have built up over a much longer period of time, so we need to think about that too. The reluctance of owners to take a long-term view and interested in their properties is a critical point in this debate. The West of Scotland Housing Association estimates that 12,500 substandard properties pre-1914 and 5,000 post-1924 properties are just amongst their members in themselves. Crumbling stonework, a lack of maintenance, roofs and gutters are just some of the problems. Glasgow City Council estimated that in 2015 that 7,000 tenements were below tolerable standards and Renfrew Council is estimated in the same year that it has 1,200 that are below tolerable standard. That site is the main problem, a lack of routine maintenance and a lack of interest from owners generally. It is difficult to engage landlords in any discussion about their management and maintenance and the common fabric of the building. The West of Scotland Housing Association also says that former right to buy properties is now a major time bomb. In fact, in my own experience and I am sure in others, many owners did not seem to fully understand that with ownership comes the responsibility of the property and the common part, the stair, the clothes and the solemn. We need some solutions. We need solutions that help ordinary tenants trying to take common decisions, everyday decisions of common repairs and ensure that the law favours them over absentee landlords who cannot be found and not taking an interest in their properties. We need to support landlords trying to invest in their properties. We need long-term thinking that does not penalise only current owners. We need to support housing associations too in the work that they are doing. I believe that in this Parliament we will need some legislation but I think that if we work together with a group that is already set up and working effectively I think that there will be some common ground between us. I believe that we can do some good here for the owners of tenement properties and make the law stronger in their favour. It was my mission to say that Pauline McNeill was speaking to amendment 12342.2. May I ask her to move it, please? I move, Presiding Officer. Thank you very much. I move to Andy Wightman for up to four minutes, please. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer, and thanks to Graham Simpson for using Conservative business to bring forward a motion on a topic that is designed to achieve a broad agreement across the chamber. As he mentioned, this followed by McPherson's members' debate earlier this year, and I'm delighted that we've subsequently established a cross-party working group on maintenance of tenement scheme property. Graham Simpson posited that as in contrast to a cross-party group that doesn't do any work. A lot of cross-party groups do a lot of work but I'm sure that he didn't mean to imply that. Scottish Greens have a manifesto commitment to establish a not-for-profit repair service to manage major repairs together with commitments to look at all books, sinking funds and mandatory energy efficiency measures at point of sale in the private sector. We also promised to press for the removal of VAT on building repairs, and I welcome the minister's comments on that regard. Given that more people are likely to live in flattered property than any other type of domestic property and with 68 per cent of dwellings in Edinburgh in particular being flattered, it's incumbent on us to deal with those highly unsatisfactory statutory repairs that confronts far too many people on a daily basis. Getting things right for tenement dwellers is not just about ensuring maintenance, it's also about promoting their health, having personally experienced threats of physical violence and harassment in the past when trying to initiate tenement repairs. I can well understand and through meeting constituents understand the stress and anxiety that comes from poor governance in tenements. The private sectors made some useful interventions such as the Tenement Health Check policy, but there are still huge legal and financial barriers standing in the way of maintaining tenements to a acceptable standard. Presiding Officer, how long do I have? Four minutes. Four minutes, thank you. Much of the flattered property in Edinburgh and Glasgow, Aberdeen as well, Dundee, was built more than a century ago. With proper refurbishment and maintenance, those buildings should last many more centuries. Tenements, in my view, are part of the public infrastructure of our cities, just as the streets, the sewers and the utilities are, but within the public infrastructure those at the moment are framed in law as private interests. It's essentially short-term interests, typically 10 years, perhaps 15 years, that too often prevails and frustrates the necessity of regular maintenance that could ensure the long-term good condition of shared property. I be keen to that we frame this debate as one concerning public infrastructure rather than strictly private property. The law is further complicated as Dr Frankie McCarthy from the School of Law at Glasgow University helped to outline at a recent meeting of the cross-party group on renewable energy where she observed that in law there is no such thing as a building but a set of individual flats so we have a fragmentation of ownership. The rules of ownership are not standard, the default rules are set out in the Tenement Scotland Act 2004, but the title deeds may well say something different. Strategic areas of the tenement are not always owned by the same people, the walls, the roof and the foundations. There is no management at all built into the tenure system. In principle, all owners are responsible, but in practice there is nothing in Scotland's system of land tenure relating to owners' associations, to meet no maintenance plans, no sinking funds and management generally is reactive at best. While repairs and maintenance can be done with a majority vote, improvements require unanimity. I think that we used to do things a little bit better in the members' debate that I spoke of. I mentioned visiting Edinburgh City chambers and finding a small dark room full of cabinets with index cards, all noting inspections that the council had made to tenement property across the city up until around the early 1980s. We used to have systems in place. We need to review the legislation to ensure that they come back. I'm pleased to see the motion and the amendments all largely say the same thing and we're supporting them all this evening. I call Alex Cole-Hamilton, up to four minutes please. It's always very hard to follow Andy Wightman in a speech such as this. I'm very much one of those MSPs who learn at the knee of the maestru in this regard and I like to put on record my thanks not just for this debate but for the additional assistance he's given me in and ownership matters as well. Thank you to the contribution of the Conservatives. Would everyone be quiet please? Mr Wightman would like to hear this. Despite that outburst I am very grateful to the Conservatives for bringing today's motion before us. I think it's a very important one. It's gratified to hear that they will be accepting the Government amendment because I think it would be wrong to pre-empt the outcome of that expert working group into this critical area. I think if I can reflect on the fact that the shadow of Grenfell falls far and wide across our housing policy landscape, if ever there was an event to concentrate minds around building integrity, around property repair and upgrading the needs for building safety checks, it is to be found in the ashes of that fire. I showed yesterday to sign the private members bill in the name of David Stewart to see fire protection systems installed in properties of a certain size. I was also gratified by the responsibility shown by the industry, the property factor industry in the aftermath of that event and that the property managers association of Scotland rushed to assist the Scottish Government in its efforts to ascertain just how many additional buildings were exposed. Property management is an important structure within the theatre of our housing delivery in this country. By and large, factors act responsibly and offer solutions to everyday problems like communal living, whether that is stairlighting, security, cleaning, insurance provision, but they also have a role in that early foothills rather of our democracy by establishing residence associations helping residents to come together and work together to make their communities better and address common problems. There are some rogue elements as within any sector. There are rogue elements in that trade too and there have been several concerns expressed already in this debate about the way that factors respond to concerns of residents, about the collection of unpaid fees from paying customers and how incremental charge increases and exorbitant one-off management fees can often be the subject of our post-bags in terms of constituency casework. I have a great deal of support for Labour's amendment in particular around the idea of co-operatives being used to step in as an alternative for factoring in this regard. The thrust of my amendment, had it been taken, was twofold. First, the sustainability of the property and the improvements to the properties that we are making but also a recognition as Graham Simpson articulated very well in his opening remarks about that backlog of repairs that we have in our housing stock and that 28 per cent of which require critical, abjectly critical repairs that are not being seen to. The point is that that runs to billions of pounds and somebody has to pay for that and invariably up to this point that somebody has been people being slapped with a statutory charge notice. It is not something that anybody expected or would have wanted but the introduction as I think Andy Wightman referenced in the SYNC funds that he talks about, those owner-contributed repair funds which can soften the blow that will inevitably come in that aspect of communal living and particularly aging stock. Now this is very much an important debate and I am very glad actually of the consensus that I didn't necessarily expect to come into this afternoon. I think it's a measure of just how important this Parliament regards it and that we need to get this right. We need to listen to the recommendations of the cross-party working group when they are published and I am very gratified that the minister confirmed that his Government would be willing to bring forward legislation should that be required. Thank you. We now go to the open part of the debate. I call Jeremy Balfour to be followed by Ben Macpherson. I'm afraid it's quite a tight four minutes this afternoon. Jeremy Balfour. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and again I thank the contribution so far. I should remind members that for 12 years I was in Edinburgh councillor and for most of that period I chaired the governance, risk and best value committee in the council and spent many, many hours listening to evidence about what went wrong here in Edinburgh in regard to our tenement repair scandal and I think there are lessons that we need to learn from that, not just here in Edinburgh for across Scotland. Edinburgh, like other cities, do have many tenements. Many of them are Asian many of them require maintenance and many of them require safety not just for the owners but for those who are walking on the pavement when often things go wrong it affects the wider community. As Graham Simpson mentioned in his speech Riggs has mooted the idea of having regular health checks on buildings and we do welcome that but I think there becomes the challenge because Andy Wightman was right that up until the mid 1980s here in Edinburgh every tenement building was checked on a regular basis and detailed records were kept but the issue then comes what happens if the tenement is not being maintained correctly because we can have all the good wishes and all the aspirations of wanting tenements kept in the right order or the correct sanctions and enforcement behind that and unless local authorities are then willing to do that we are simply going to end up in a situation with lots of notices put on buildings but no enforcement and no action taken and in places again like Edinburgh where you have a lot of landlords who do not live here it is not an easy way to enforce there are many people particularly too in front of me who are much better I'm sure on tenement law than I am but it is a complex area and again I think it is something we need to look at if we are going to move forward with any new legislation because the law at best is unclear that takes me briefly on to my second point because factoring can help my first flat that I bought here in Edinburgh was a modern flat and a factor was almost imposed upon us now it did actually work well the flat was well looked after it was clean and tidy at least outside if not inside but it was expensive there was no choice as to who we could choose to be our factor it was simply imposed upon us through the tighter deeds that we do here in Edinburgh that has not been the tradition and there are many flats in Edinburgh which have no tenements and I'm sure all of us who are low-vain or Edinburgh MSPs will have had male bags of maybe one individual an older person trying to get the flat or the stairway cleaned and just simply not being able to do it because other people won't do it and again I think factoring is the way forward and I come back to that but again there must be the right sanctions and enforcement behind that so that there is power and I would also suggest there must also be the choice on who you have as your factor and how that works for the individual flat owners rather than somebody else imposing upon it I too welcome this debate I welcome this consensus that is occurring around the chamber but before we part ourselves too much from our back I think it is easy to analyse the difficulties coming up with the solutions may take a lot harder work thank you thank you I call Ben Macpherson to be followed by Daniel Johnson Ben Macpherson thank you very much and I also very very much welcome the use of this time for this important debate building on the momentum of the 2004 act that was brought previously the 2014 act and my members' debate in January and the establishment of our working group thereafter and what we're doing I think it's always good to start with a definition and I know others have talked about how inclusive the idea of a tenement is but I think if we look at the definition in the 2004 act which is a building or a part of a building which comprises two related flats that are designed to be separate and divided from each other horizontally so a block of four or bigger and I think it's just important to emphasise that because it's not just relevant to the tenement that I live in and my constituents many many of my constituents live in that sort of larger tenement it's also relevant to different parts of Scotland and that includes rural parts of Scotland as well so this is a big issue it's about a quarter of Scotland's domestic housing stock about half a million homes so this is a huge matter for us all to consider and it's crucial because it really matters it really matters to people's quality of life whether their communal stair is in good condition or not or there's a secure lock on the door it really matters if the roof is in good condition not just for the integrity of the building but for the life in which all owners or tenants are living within that property as has been said and very well said by the last speaker this is a very complex area of law and policy with local government national government private law in terms of deeds and rights as well so we need to think very carefully about how we proceed in this the current powers are helping things like under one roof and the missing share are making a difference but there is more work to do in terms of the issues that we all receive in terms of the case work that we have and also the wider points that are made by stakeholders so the group that I've been working with other MSPs and experts and stakeholders on is looking at how we come forward with new solutions not just to repair and maintain but also to enhance and that's why energy efficiency in matters like that that I've been raised are so important and we're looking at this in three main ways we need to think about first of all who initiates works who organises and how do we get people to pay for it and one of the questions around that is yes factors are one way of doing that but are there other mechanisms that we need to think about to facilitate owners decision making and the instruction of maintenance work do we need a new standard entity for owners to organise within helping owners to connect and communicate with each other and also create that leadership and organisation a structure for collective decision making so that's one area that we're looking at the other area that's been touched on is around inspections potentially regular inspections to get away from repairs and towards maintenance so there's less need for repair and there are possibilities about whether this should be part of the home report as properties are passed on and the other area then is finance which is around sinking funds, credit unions and I welcome the suggestion of co-operatives in that discussion as well so we need to think about a set of arrangements for the long term and think through this issue thoroughly as has already been said to make sure that we come up with really well thought through solutions that are going to last in the medium and long term there's a lot more I could say but I'll conclude by saying this it's great to see the Parliament coming together to play its part to try and help our constituents come together and maintain the urban and rural integrity of Scotland now I'm going forward thank you I call Daniel Johnson to be followed by Gordon Linter Daniel Johnson it's a huge pleasure that I stand to speak in this debate speaking after Graham Simpson, Ben Macpherson Andy Wightman and I'm sure others from the working group will be speaking too I think we may be forming something of the world's geekiest boy band and while we might not be pretty to look at I think we are all singing in harmony on this issue sorry for the bad joke but this is a hugely important issue and I think Graham Simpson was absolutely right in two regards as you opened this debate of the wider housing issues but also just the scale of the maintenance repair that has to take place because I think all too often the housing debate is one that's dominated by definitions and one which sees people splitting here between one form of housing or another citing telephone numbers without any regard to levels of demand or the level of housing need because we on this side of the chamber as a point of historic principle view housing as a right as part of Labour's legacy and history and one that I think is an important part of our future politics because I think we have to accept that the market based thinking around housing viewing it simply as a commodity has failed because we have a situation where while incomes have been largely flat rents especially in Edinburgh and Glasgow has risen by almost a third in the last decade while mortgage owned property has fallen by a quarter in the same period and outstripping incomes and housing poverty is a very real issue that very opportunities and expectations people might have had merely a decade ago are simply becoming dreams for all too many so if we view housing as a right I think we must also I think accept Andy Wightman's language about viewing housing as infrastructure, public infrastructure that is a property that is a sense of common ownership as well as private ownership and we must also recognise the issue of mixed tenure and occupancy because in the last few decades the reality is that we've got a picture where it's not just about tenement living in the traditional sense but we have a wide variety of different properties but critically within those properties multiple forms of ownership and tenure we may well have council tenants but owner occupiers or private rented property and with the proliferation of small private landlords the issues around maintenance become hugely problematic so there's a very real case for change and indeed I welcome the issues that the working group is going to be looking at and I think Ben Macpherson set it out very well because there's a sense in which the individualised concept of ownership that much of our property in the way that people own tenemented properties just simply doesn't take into account the fact that they are very much owners of a collective building that there is a sense of common ownership within a single building which just simply isn't captured within the law and I think this is the fundamental point which needs to be captured and needs to be addressed in law and I'd also like to thank the Tenement Action Group whose work very much is acted as a very positive starting point and they supplied the working group with a list of seven key points that they would like to see addressed and they ranged from simple things about having the owner contact details for all the owners in a stair available and freely shared something that while the identity of owners is publicly available the means of contacting them is not but there are issues ranged through from those simple prosaic points through to issues around sinking funds and debt recovery and I think critical to this is making sure that we go from a situation which is more than just about enabling owners to get compensation and make arrangements for common repairs on a one-off basis but on-going preventative maintenance that's what we need to see and I see my time is up I could go on for much longer but fundamentally we do need to see a change in law it's far too important our housing belongs to us all we need to make sure that they are properly maintained thank you thank you very much I'll get the wrong way round Gordon Lindhurst could follow Richard Lyle your Richard Lyle is ready we'll let Richard Lyle speak I didn't quite hear that Richard Lyle Can I have again this afternoon by welcoming the opportunity to contribute to this debate which is an issue which I'm very familiar with especially having served as a council model district council then subsequently North Lancer council for some 36 years housing is of course a core role for local government and today's debate will I hope provide me with an opportunity to address that which the Conservative benches have raised from outset in this debate I wish to raise the fact that there has been a marked and sustained improvement in the quality of housing in Scotland and indeed displayed to Scottish housing conditions survey shows a continual long-time trend of improvement in the levels of this repair it is important to know that the problems can affect newer buildings as well as older ones and they occur right across Scotland however there's a recognition that this repair is worse than older tenement buildings and this Scottish Government I believe recognises that there can be particular difficulties in dealing with common repairs and tenements which require co-operation between owners and can cut across tenures from my experience in the council I know it's hard it's a fact that trying to fix issues between the council properties and private owners or landlords is hard it takes longer and it's a headache at times the right to buy act allow people to own but created multi-owner problems often some owners particularly those who are elderly don't have the finance to renovate and these are the problems we must address that said I think it's important to point out to the chamber that although we in the SNP must be must not be complacent the improvement levels of this repair is absolutely a reflection of the positive actions that this Government has already taken from new powers introduced in the housing Scotland Act 2014 to our work on consulting on improving condition standards in the private sector draft regulations are proposed later this year councils can use those powers to pay and recover from owners who do not contribute and I would encourage them to do so and thinking about conditions of housing I was reminded of a time as a councillor during when I was faced with bison-type flats in my ward which had the most horrendous dampness and poor conditions talk about green, these were very green walls through my engagement at the time of the authority they certainly demolished them and replaced them with new high quality buildings and whilst this did add me that amongst my many other names the nickname of demolition dick is now paying dividends in Bell sill and I'm sure this is a matter which must be considered too when we look at the disrepair of some properties in North Lancer now we have excellent capital investment programme sorry Mr Simpson I have to agree that North Lancer and they'll be surprised I'm saying this that North Lancer is working with his and they are working with private owners and therefore I don't believe there's any monopoly on those good ideas and I welcome the commitment from the Government that they will look at all possible solutions many issues to address these problems have been previously raised in the Scottish Government's common housing quality standard forum including stinking funds and the five-year lieutenant surveys they've also been suggested by RICS the built environment forum Scotland chartered institute of housing all of these and I'm sure the ideas which the Government will listen to we all wish to solve this problem and thank to the Scottish Government support for local authorities and through legislation that progress is being made in this issue progress which is very much welcome and rightly be recognised thank you Mr Lyle Gordon Lindhurst to be followed by John Mason it is indeed a delight to be allowed an opportunity to speak in this debate and I'm sure if I can match Richard Lyle's speech and I certainly can't match some of the nicknames that he says are attributed to him turning to this important and welcome debate there are of course a few issues more important than our housing stock indeed we the Scottish Conservatives consistently ask for the Scottish Government to be more ambitious in house building but of course that will be in vain if our current stock is left to crumble around us homes are places where we spend huge amounts of our time private time with family and friends in warmth and comfort if the conditions are right but if they are not it can have far reaching and negative consequences including on health the tenement buildings of the old and new towns is an important part in Edinburgh as a world heritage site 48 per cent of housing built pre-1945 in Edinburgh and 56 per cent of that is flats across Scotland as a whole it is said that 68 per cent of all dwellings are in some degree of disrepair now I've been fortunate to have experienced living in a tenement in Edinburgh but also unfortunate like others in trying to have necessary common repairs to be out unlike the Alex Cole-Hamilton described Maestro Andy Wightman I have more generally met complete and utter disinterest rather than threats of violence or harassment and I think it is easy to see why given that sort of background how easily tenements can start to decay if only some people are prepared to stump up their fair share as recognised by many organisations including the RICS cosmetic changes can seem far more attractive to a homeowner who can experience the almost immediate depending on the workman and tangible benefits of showering in a new bathroom or making dinner in a newly fitted kitchen but if a block isn't maintained the risk of being condemned as unfit to live in later down the line is greater now this was described by Dr James Simpson who initiated the Tenement Action Group as the plateau of good repair which describes how failure to maintain a building regularly can be hugely inefficient helping people to see this as all well and good but today the Scottish Conservatives are encouraging the Scottish Government to think about what can actually be done to deal with Scotland's tenement housing stock even mandatory building health checks will only be as effective as they are accurate and as they are easily enforceable as Ben Macpherson pointed to public buy-in and acceptance of these is also essential and they must be affordable a box ticking exercise simply will not do and I think for example of problems with EPCs so a culture of factoring including a mandatory system for new build flats could mean that owners can maintain buildings from the very beginning and keep their place on the sunny plateau already mentioned as we have heard today some factors do a superb job but others leave an awful lot to be desired Graham Simpson pointed to this 70 per cent of complaints upheld last year against factors is deeply concerning it tells us the current system is not working in the interests of homeowners as it ought to be factoring needs to be transparent and accountable with bad factors identified and dealt with the future of our housing stock is not simply determined by how many houses we build now but how we maintain what we have in closing it is imperative that the Government reviews the current system and takes effective steps to protect our housing stock now thank you John Mason as others have said there is a lot in the conservative motion that I can certainly agree with and not least the basic statement of the fact that we do have a problem with common repairs to tenement properties if I am going to declare an interest today it is that I am an owner occupier in the state of about 270 privately owned ex-council tenements I paid about £25,000 for my flat in 1990 and is probably now worth between three times that however during these 28 years there has been no substantial maintenance work done and as far as I am aware not even a thorough inspection we have a factor in place and I have no complaint about them they arrange common buildings insurance and grounds maintenance as well as charging what I think is a fairly modest administration fee however even then some owners have substantial arrears and the factor has said that there are problems with owner occupiers than they do with landlords who let out their property there can also be a lack of understanding that the admin fee is not actually going into maintenance work or some sinking fund the problem in our estate is an unwillingness or inability of owners to pay for regular checks and maintenance so basically this estate which won an award for bellways refurbishment has been deteriorating for the last 29 years and looks like it will keep deteriorating for the next 29 years Just on Monday another resident in the estate obviously a constituent phoned me to see if we could arrange a public meeting maybe change the factors or take some other action to move things forward I explained to him that previously we did do that we did have a very large public meeting but we could not find six residents to form a residence committee but anyway I will meet him next week so given that there is a problem what are we going to do about it I guess some of us could say that it is a private matter and Parliament should stay clear of it and there are some good things that are going on but often they are on a very small scale at the moment some of the housing associations in my constituency are working with Glasgow City Council to purchase a few of the worst flats in the hope of improving the whole close but inevitably this is a small scale Speaking to property managers housing associations, Ricks and others it does seem there is widespread feeling that things need to change which is why Ben Macpherson has led and setting up a working group and a number of us at backbenchers are keen to look at the options I think that I have two main questions at the moment one, what is the model we are aiming to get to? Can it be a voluntary scheme of regular inspections which would make owners and potential purchasers aware of the problems with their properties and hopefully encourage them to take action? Or does there need to be an element of compulsion possibly including a requirement for factors or at least a more formal self factoring such as I think Labour proposed with the co-operative arrangements? My second question is how and how quickly can we move to such a desired model especially if we agree that there is some need or for some level of compulsion how do we cope with the many owner occupations that are needed and who do not have the savings to pay a hefty maintenance bill and who do not have the income to borrow commercially? I think that we would need to look at some innovative methods for example interest free loans which would only be repairable when a flat was sold or transferred as I think the SFHA mentioned in their briefing. With any of those options there are likely to be costs to homeowners and that has the potential to be politically challenging. If one party went into an election proposing that I fear that it could cause them problems. I think that that is an issue that would benefit hugely from cross-party agreement and I hope that the working group together with the Government can look through the various alternatives and come up with something that would have broad consensus both in the model that we are aiming for and in the timescale for implementing it. Thank you. Thank you very much. We now move to closing speeches. I call Alex Rowley to be followed by Minister Kevin Stewart. John Mason talked about the need for cross-party co-operation and agreement and I think that today we have seen that there is cross-party agreement that something needs to be done here and I certainly would welcome as others have done the fact that the Conservatives have used their time to have this discussion today on what is a very important issue. Ben Macpherson and Daniel Johnson both spoke about the definitions and the definition that I had from spices, that the tenement is broadly in legislation to include, for example, modern blocks of flats, so-called four-in-a-block properties and buildings that have been subdivided into flats, so there is a lot there. Interestingly, a few weeks ago I had a contact with a councillor in Dumfirmland as Graham Simpson gave the example of his constituent, Sophie. I think that that is an experience that many people who live in flats and four-in-a-block and what would be the traditional tenement experience. That councillor said to me that the situation in two-king of Drum Street in Dumfirmland was a real problem with there are owner occupiers and council tenants in the same block and five council are unable to get the work done due to this issue with people now I do have the definition and more detail from Spice which I have sent to the head of housing in five council asking him to look at this and advise where there is weaknesses in the law so that we can look at that because John Mason also asked a question about what is it that we are trying to do here and how quickly and I think we do need to ask those questions off the minister. The minister said that councils do have powers and they do have powers to step in and pay missing shares where an owner cannot be found or where the owner is unwilling to pay but there may be financial restraints on them doing so and I would ask the minister perhaps one of the things given that there is cross-party agreement in here that this is an issue that needs to be tackled fairly quickly then could we not get the housing conveners and councils round the table with COSLA to start to have a discussion around that to say what are the issues as far as the local authorities are concerned because some use the missing shares root law and some don't let's find out what that's about and what else because I'm sure there is also a consensus right across local councils that we need to do someone on this issue. Graham Simpson will extend an invitation to Alex Rowley to come to the next meeting of the working group when I shall reveal what every Scottish council told me in answer to his questions. Alex Rowley I mean I certainly would be pleased to do so and I'm certain that our housing spokesperson Pauline McNeill will also want to hear what Graham Simpson has to say because as Pauline McNeill said there is issues around do we need more powers do we need more investment and that also to be clear that with ownership comes responsibility when you live and these types of tenements that are being raised and that was an important point that was made by Andy Wightman when he talked about the promotion of health and the stress and anxiety that can be caused for tenants and we need to take that on board but I think he also made a very important point that I will conclude on which is that these tenements and much of this if the investment goes in they will last for centuries if that investment does not go in then we will need to be building more houses never mind the 50,000 affordable houses that the Government plans just now to replace those run down tenements so it's in the public interest that we resolve the smart R there is consensus in this chamber to do so to work with everyone to try and find a solution thank you thank you very much and I call the minister Kevin Stewart thank you very much I am again pleased to close on this debate a welcome Mr Simpson's motion I have to say I'm a bit surprised to hear discussion today of parliamentary boy bands and the exploits of demolition dick but you never know what you're going to get in this chamber but if I could first of all turn to some of the issues that have been raised and I'm going to concentrate on the issues that have been discussed here today Mr Rowley has made a very good point around about talking to housing conveners and I can assure Mr Rowley that I will ensure that that's on the agenda for my next meeting with council housing conveners Mr Johnson asked me earlier on about which local authorities are using the missing share powers and which are not the civil servants have come up with an answer quite quickly because they probably don't want to give you the letter saves them time there are currently eight local authorities with a policy in place and four missing shares and seven have used their powers those seven are South Ayrshire, Glasgow Edinburgh, Dundee, Aberdeen East Lothian and East Renfrewshire and number Clyde has the policy but has not used the power yet as far as we are aware I want to move from that eight to all 32 if they need to use those powers and Mr Rowley and Mr Johnson can be assured that I will raise that with housing conveners in Mr Lyle's speech he mentioned the common housing quality standard forum a very important body which has not been mentioned very often today I am welcome the fact that Mr Lyle has raised them I will reiterate our intention to consult on conditions issues including those identified through the CHQS forum later on this year Mr Simpson in his opening remarks concentrated largely on the property factors regime and I welcome the meetings that I have had with Mr Simpson around about constituency issues and if anyone else has these issues please feel free to contact me because I do like to keep on top and try and find out how we can resolve these cases Mr Simpson knows and I will reiterate this again as well that we will consider improvements to strengthen that property factors regulatory regime and we accept that most factors provide a good service but there are some out there who are not Mr Simpson also mentioned repeat offender property factors at tribunal I do not want to go into too much depth today about the first tier tribunal it is an independent judicial body and it really wouldn't be appropriate for me to comment on such cases or the decisions of the tribunal there has been talk about housing associations today particularly by Ms McNeill I agree with her completely and utterly that housing associations do excellent work in maintaining their properties the new powers for local authorities regarding missing share will be extended to them but they too will have the ability to use those powers Both Mr Wightman and Ms McNeill talked of the short term approach and I agree that in the review work that is going on in the group and elsewhere that we must look at long term sustainable solutions whether that be through legislation or through other approaches and I agree completely utterly with Ms McNeill that during the course of this work we must think about the costs to owners because at the end of the day we can come up with some amazing schemes but if folk don't have the ability to invest then that is not going to happen and I think that the work that we are doing in terms of our pilot scheme in Glasgow and Ross in Argyll and Bute will help inform us on how we can maybe help more in that regard Presiding Officer I apologise to those that took part today who I have not mentioned I will finish off by mentioning Ben Macpherson whose members debate I think has moved things on a pace with the working group and now with this debate here in Parliament I think it's extremely important for all of us to continue to talk to one another about these vital issues and although we have concentrated a large amount of today's debate on the buildings themselves the reality is that this debate is all about people and how we get it right for them the length and breadth of Scotland Thank you very much Presiding Officer Thank you Minister Jamie Greene to conclude our debate Thank you Presiding Officer I appreciate that we are getting near to 5 o'clock but I will try to get through as much as I can Possibly to the intrigue of the members who have joined us I should say to Mr Stewart the less we talk about demolition dick the better I think this afternoon but other than that it has been a very short but quite a useful debate brought to the chamber today I probably should start by declaring an interest that I am one of those people in generation X perhaps in a millennial there were many people stuck in an endless cycle of paying high rents at a time when the financial world had collapsed and simply weren't lending money but today's debate isn't just about the difficulties facing a generation of people who rent property it's about equally improving housing conditions for those who own their properties especially those living in communal buildings often with quite mixed ownership that we as MSPs know more than anyone the sheer disparity of housing quality in Scotland after all our careers are predicated on knocking on many of those doors asking for jobs When I was a member of the Equalities and Human Rights Committee part of our inquiry into human rights in Scotland Ben Macpherson and I visited a housing estate in Leith not far from this Parliament where it's fair to say that residents were living in quite unacceptable conditions dampness, poor wiring graffiti drug paraphernalia in the communal areas and it took a huge amount of advocacy and for residents to come together to lobby the local council to accept that this wasn't just unacceptable conditions the housing they were in were breaching their basic human rights now to give the council credit the situation there has improved and that community is a much safer, cleaner and vibrant community but others have much less of a voice in this how many people do not know or what recourse is available to them when things go wrong ricks found that a substantial portion of our housing stock is at risk from a lack of maintenance that they described it as a condition cliff edge they concluded that the Government simply has to address the maintenance agenda or that future generations will not thank us for passing on this problem I don't disagree if 44% of homes in Scotland are failing to meet the Scottish housing quality standard then why have 17 councils not issued a single work notice to require owners to carry out remedial work in the past five years why is that why are they so reluctant to use the powers that the 2006 act gave them much has been said today also around the issue of factors we want to see a system of compulsory factoring in new build flats that increased regulations in the sector and culture of property management in Scotland like many MSPs we deal with a tremendous amount of case work related to problematic factors I won't name names but there is a problem and there is a pattern of bad behaviour factoring contracts being sold from one company to another factoring companies fabricating competitive quotations and giving work to preferred suppliers and often dubious circumstances so reluctant to collect revenues from every tenant in a block for upgrades or restorative repairs and in some cases tenants are really getting very little for their money deteriorating standards in communal areas and gardens and facades aging and in need of upgrade despite promises to do so If I have time Thank you very much for giving way I was just wondering if the member would agree with us that cooperative structures and owners associations could act as an alternative to factoring and do members keep the general conversation down Mr Greene? Mr Johnson makes a good point factoring we think it should be compulsory on new build flats to get those practices in place on the very beginning in some circumstances where neighbours and communities can work together to form communal groups then that may be the right way forward as comments but Graham Simpson gave an excellent example of what happens when it doesn't go well he gave the example of one of his constituents who took matters into their own hands at their own expense because they really had no choice otherwise but I don't think they should have to the fees are taken month after month and the response from factors is often aggressive, nonchalant and quite unhelpful and that's not anecdotal I've written to factors that have been taken with us as MSPs, not least with their own constituents but this isn't an anti-factor debate there is good practice out there it's not a rogue trade but it is a trade with rogues in it and we need to do more for our constituents we're also calling for a more robust system of complaint and tribunal process that has real powers of compliance and ultimately there needs to be a process for the removal of factors that are constantly failing their duties and who are repeat offenders if the sheer volume of case work that we get on this matter isn't proof enough of the need for change then goodness knows what we need to intervene so presiding officer and summing up here's what these benches are asking of the government today mandatory health checks on buildings compulsory factoring schemes on new build flats beefing up the complaint system for factors status quo increase regulation of factors and a transparent register of factors with writings that flags poor performance and poor practice and what more can government do to ensure that councils are able to and even willing to use the powers already at their disposal and yes we should take a frank look at current housing legislation is it fit for purpose I wouldn't label any of these as today particularly partisan so I do hope that the minister and the government reflects on today's debates or as ricks warned us future generations will give us little thanks for passing on this problem thank you very much and that concludes our debate on housing the next debate is consideration of business motions 1 2 3 8 7 and 1 2 3 8 8 we set out a business programme and the timetable for a bill at stage 1 if anyone wishes to speak against those motions please say so now and I call on Jovis Patrick on behalf of the Parliament to be able to move the motions on block moved on block thank you no one objects therefore the question is I propose to put a single question on these two motions does anyone object to that no therefore the question is that motions 1 2 3 8 7 and 1 2 3 8 8 in the name of Jovis Patrick be agreed are we all agreed we are agreed the next item of business is consideration of Parliamentary Bureau of Motion 1 2 3 8 9 on code of conduct for councillors could I call on Jovis Patrick on behalf of the bureau to move the motion formally moved thank you we turn now to decision time the first question is the amendment 1 2 3 5 8 0.4 in the name of John Swinney which seeks to amend motion 1 2 3 5 8 in the name of Liz Smith on education subject choices be agreed we are agreed the next question is that amendment 1 2 3 5 8 0.1 in the name of Ian Gray which seeks to amend the motion in the name of Liz Smith on education be agreed are we all agreed we are agreed and the next question is that motion 1 2 3 5 8 in the name of Liz Smith as amended on education subject choices be agreed are we all agreed we are agreed now I remind members that if the amendment in the name of Kevin Stewart is agreed the next question is that amendment 1 2 3 4 2.3 in the name of Kevin Stewart which seeks to amend motion 1 2 3 4 2 in the name of Graham Simpson on housing be agreed are we all agreed we are not agreed we will move to a vote members may cast their votes now the result of the vote on amendment 1 2 3 4 2.3 in the name of Kevin Stewart is yes 101 no 21 the amendment in the name of Polly McNeill is preempted and therefore the next question is that motion 1 2 3 4 2 in the name of Graham Simpson as amended on housing be agreed are we all agreed the final question is that motion 1 2 3 8 9 in the name of Jovis Patrick on behalf of the Bureau on code of conduct for councillors be agreed are we all agreed we are agreed that concludes decision time when I move to members business system of Scotland in the big noise orchestra but we'll take a few moments for members to and ministers to change seats