 The final item of business is members' business debate on motion 8370 in the name of Andy Wightman on homes first. This debate will be concluded without any questions being put, and I would ask those members who wish to speak in this debate to press the request to speak buttons now. I call on Andy Wightman to open the debate for around seven minutes, please, Mr Wightman. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I thank those members from all parties who have signed my motion and have turned up this evening to contribute to this debate. I also welcome those in the public gallery, many of whom are living with the impact of short-term lets every day of their lives, and I hope that today can bring some assurance that Parliament is willing to tackle this issue with some urgency. My motion highlights an issue that is of significant concern to very large numbers of my constituents, and it is on their behalf that I speak today. I want to clarify what this motion is not about. It is not about the collaborative economy where people rent out a room in their house on a peer-to-peer platform. It is not about the platforms themselves. It is about the framework in which decisions are made or currently not made about the very existence, extent, scope and nature of the use of residential property in their entirety as short-term letting businesses. Short-term letting has a long history. I am sure that many members have hired a self-catering property in rural Scotland, for example, for holidays. In rural Scotland, such properties form an important part of the tourism economy and provide valuable income for local businesses. In most cases, however, such properties are detached dwellings and have received planning consent for use as a self-catering property. However, even in rural Scotland, there remain issues to be resolved about the extent of second homes and short-term lets in areas of acute housing need. However, it is in Edinburgh that the phenomenon has taken off and where the implications of this unregulated market is causing severe distress to the quality of life of my constituents. Those include antisocial behaviour within communal areas, a loss of community as speculators buy up properties and turn them into short-term lets, mental ill health, including anxiety and stress, associated with not knowing who is coming and going, the displacement of the residential population as homes are acquired as lucrative short-term lets and those that are left are left to decide whether to stay or not, a tax gap as thousands of properties are not on the valuation role and the pain of non-domestic rates, and finally concerns over security as keys are distributed to hundreds of unknown persons every year, allowing access to residential areas. On one online advertising website, there are 5,474 whole properties available for let in the city of Edinburgh—almost double the number in July last year. That is despite a city of Edinburgh council presumption in planning against any short-term lets in flattered properties, yet thousands exist. It is despite thousands of domestic dwellings having conditions in their title deeds, restricting the use of property to a main home and prohibiting any business use, yet thousands of owners are flouting those conditions, with no redress available to affected neighbours. A tax system that is meant to ensure the payment of non-domestic rates to support the provision of public services in the city is failing to collect over £10 million due to owners not declaring their properties and because of the 100 per cent relief granted through the small business bonus scheme. I reiterate that the mischief complained of here is not that of homeowners renting out rooms as part of the collaborative economy. It is the situation whereby changes of use are taking place to residential property with no democratic scrutiny or accountability, and properties are being marketed to tourists despite those properties not complying with the law. It is a situation that is causing a degree of stress and misery that should not be tolerated, that causes, for example, a school pupil to fail her exam because of lack of sleep due to an unannounced party by strangers in the flat above her bedroom. Other testimony is as follows. We have lost a neighbour and gained an endless stream of strangers. Cheap holiday lets come at a very high price for people living next door to them. What was our neighbour's house is now a hotel with no planning permission, no safety regulations and no regard to families living next door. I am leaving the old town, my home for the past 25 years. I have sold my flat and I am moving out in January. I have nothing but feelings of utter contempt for the selfish and irresponsible people who have done this. The council has been both complicit and complacent, presiding over an increasingly dire situation that is only interested, it seems, in turning the city centre into a transit camp. For the record, those were some of a very, very large number of testimonies that we have received over the past few months. This motion is called Homes First. That is the name of a campaign that I launched yesterday to tackle this scourge. Homes First means what it says. There is an affordable housing crisis in this city, and residential accommodation that exists should be used to provide homes for residents in the first instance. Only through a careful and considered process in the planning system should any short-term lets of whole properties let out on a commercial basis be allowed. The human rights of my constituents to housing and to the peaceful enjoyment of their property is being violated by the rapid and uncontrolled expansion of short-term lets. One constituent recently observed to me that there are three key factors that have led to the rapid growth of this market—cheap flights, online accommodation platforms and wheelie suitcases. Members here today, before the close of this debate, can, if they so wish, easily book a short break in Madrid, Paris or Berlin from their mobile phone or tablet device. Although that has created unprecedented freedom for some, it has caused untold misery for others. To resolve that issue, we need to recognise two distinct issues. The first is how we give councils the powers to effectively decide the appropriate scale, location and scope of short-term lets. That is a first-order question of how property is used, a question normally addressed by the planning system, in particular by the land-use class order system and a first-order question as to whether short-term lets should even exist in any given location. The second question is how we effectively regulate the operation of any short-term letting system and how we manage the impacts. That, Presiding Officer, is a second-order question to be addressed once we have dealt with the first question, because it is not a question that in itself resolves the core issues, which is where and in what circumstances should a change of use be allowed from a domestic dwelling to a commercial short-letting business. To conclude, a modern-day clearance is under way as long-established communities are torn asunder in the face of global market forces. Across the rest of Scotland, two changes are under way in towns and rural communities, as there is a new wave of cheap travel disrupts local housing markets. As I said at the outset, that motion and that campaign is not about the collaborative economy, it is about the exploitative economy. I urge the Scottish Government to wake up to the need for action to tackle this issue before it is too late, to listen to the concerns of residents whose lives are made intolerable by a market that is out of control and a system of regulation that permits widespread illegality. I ask those who are observing from the gallery to either holler, clap or boo. We move to the open debate. We have speeches of up to four minutes, please, and Ben Macpherson to be followed by Graham Simpson. I would first of all like to commend Andy Wightman for bringing this matter to the chamber. As MSP for Edinburgh Northern and Leith, like Mr Wightman, I have also received concerning correspondence from constituents about those matters and issues, particularly from constituents of mine in the Abbey Hill colonies, not too far from this Parliament, where people have spoken about the increase in noise, the disruption at different times of the day, the strangers turning up, the damage to community and all the other aspects that Mr Wightman highlighted. Although the experience and the constituent responses that we have had may be anecdotal, it is clear that there is a trend, particularly in Edinburgh, in which the situation is and the anti-social behaviour and disruption that is associated with it is causing great concern for individuals and communities affected. I know that that will be particularly pertinent to individuals and constituents who are watching the debate today. In seeking to take action on this, like Mr Wightman, over the past months, in agreement with the general consensus that he has put forward to take action, I have been in correspondence with Scottish Government colleagues, whether that be with Cabinet Secretary Keith Brown and Minister Kevin Stewart, and with the City of Edinburgh Council and colleagues there. What is clear is that we need to think considerably and purposefully about what action needs to be taken both using existing law and whether there is any change or new initiative required. However, in order to do that, my strong view is that we need to make sure that we do that on the basis of robust empirical evidence and consideration and do that in a way that we make sure that any new initiatives that are taken forward are robust and effective. I will be happy to take a short intervention. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I welcome Ben's support for the motion. He talks about the need to get reliable information, etc. Does he accept that the voluminous testimony is, if not statistically verifiable, nevertheless enough sufficient evidence to suggest that we need change in the way that properties are used for short-term letting businesses? I empathise with that position. However, I think that we need to work with the Government both at a local authority level here in Edinburgh and at a national level in order to make sure that we act on empirical evidence. That is why I have written to both the minister, Kevin Stewart and my colleagues on City of Edinburgh Council to acquire where they are in the process of gathering evidence on the matter and what actions they are considering taking thereafter. We also await the findings of the advisory panel on the collaborative economy. It was on that basis—call me semantic—but I was not in a position where I felt that because the motion did not make reference to that need to gather evidence, I was not able to support it as drafted. However, I absolutely agree with the sentiments in it about the fact that this is a huge concern for many constituents here in Edinburgh and elsewhere. I commend Andy Wightman for bringing the motion to the chamber and I look forward to working with him, the Scottish Government and the local government here in Edinburgh, in order to make sure that we tackle the issue for the benefit of those communities and individual constituents who are being negatively affected. I thank Andy Wightman for bringing the issue to Parliament. His motion raises important issues, particularly in Edinburgh. I do not disagree with him when he says that there has been anxiety and distress among some residents over properties being let out short-term. He spelled out the situation very eloquently, but I do just need to urge a degree of caution. There is a danger on issues like this that we can take knee-jerk reactions before knowing the full picture. We should not be complacent, but we do need some balance. Tourism is vital to the Scottish economy. According to the Scottish Government, spending by tourists in Scotland generates around £12 billion of economic activity for the wider Scottish supply chain and contributes around £6 billion to Scottish GDP. Short-term lets are part of this important economy. In addition to supporting over 15,000 jobs, self-catering attracts £723 million in consumer spending and £470 million of which is spent by visitors to Scotland. In fact, in Edinburgh and the Lothians alone, self-catering supports over 2,500 jobs and brings in nearly £50 million to the capital. The headline objective of Edinburgh's own tourism strategy, Edinburgh 2020, is to increase the number of visits to the city by a third. John Finnie I am grateful for the member for accepting an intervention. Will he accept that the local authority, one of its major obligations, is to house its population? Graham Simpson I am coming on to the council. In Edinburgh, there are nearly 1,300 self-catering units on Lothian's roll. Those units are left for over 140 days a year. I accept that they are not the ones that Andy Wightman is talking about. They can be seen as commercial enterprises. I am a self-deputy Presiding Officer, a keen user of self-catering properties that have stayed throughout Scotland, Europe and elsewhere. The motion states that residents are being displaced when properties are rented out short-term. I suppose that is rather stating the obvious. However, as I have said, tourism is vital wherever you go, not just in Edinburgh. I have taken one, but I do not really have time, unless I am allowed more time. I am grateful to the member for giving way. I am sure that, if he was faced with a constituent affected by antisocial behaviour in a community, he would call for greater support from the police and greater interventions from the police. When such antisocial behaviour is happening within a tenemented or a flatted property, does he not understand the need for greater regulation, given that new phenomenon? Graham Simpson I am rather minded to agree with Ben Macpherson that we need to get the full picture here. We need to know the facts before we rush to regulation. It may well be necessary, but we need to know the facts and figures. On the data issue, there have been concerns raised at the Scottish Government's own panel on the collaborative economy about the validity of some of the scraped data that has been produced. The discussion paper from its June meeting recognised that some of the data from third-party websites was open to dispute. We need to work with people such as Airbnb and others to get things right here. It is right that, if there is an issue affecting communities, to raise it, but often the solutions can be found through dialogue rather than regulation. We need to avoid harming the tourist industry, but, if there is an issue, let's get the facts. Let's get the facts first. If we need to regulate, we should do so. Pauline McNeill I want to make a short contribution. I am very mindful of Andy Wightman's opening remarks that it is about a specific motion. I hope that Andy Wightman will not mind if I speak to that. I think that he makes a really good case for some action and regulation based on Holmes first and the situation that he outlines in Edinburgh. I cannot say for sure whether there is any comparison between Edinburgh and Glasgow here, but I have to add in that, in Glasgow city centre, and what I myself and Party Harvey have had representations from residents who feel similarly that the proliferation and the combination of short term leases, speculative buying in order to be Airbnb's and for the purpose of short term leases is absolutely interrupting with people's peaceful enjoyment of their properties. What concerns me, and this is where I think there is a similarity here, is that while no one wants to prevent the economy from booming of where people would take advantage of global platforms and cheaper opportunities to use a property for the time that they are staying in a city, it should also protect communities in that regard. In Glasgow, there has been a rise of 184 per cent of listings in global Airbnb platforms, but, importantly, 56 per cent are entire home rentals, but it has a similar impact in that people feel that there is no security where they live because so many people are coming and going from their tenement homes or their flats, and people do not always take responsibility. There is definitely evidence of anti-social behaviour in many cases. In conclusion, my feeling is that there needs to be a look at a whole range of those issues around short term leases and Airbnb, just to see if there needs to be some further regulation to protect communities. There is no doubt that, in some cases, the balance is definitely being interrupted, and I think that the primary aim is to encourage people to come and live in the city centre. It is also entitled to be treated as a community as well, and I think that Governments and local authorities need to protect people who choose to live in city centres, and if that means that we need to look at a lot of regulation, then I think that that is what we should do. Mark Ruskell, to be followed by Gordon-Lin Tush. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I also thank Andy Wightman, my colleague, for bringing forward this important topic for debate in Parliament today, as usual, is a blend of forensic analysis and passion for change. I think that, Presiding Officer, at the heart of this debate is a question about what kind of communities are we actually trying to create. There is something here about the art of placemaking and about whether councils actually have the right tools to make our places sustainable places. Why do we want to visit beautiful places as tourists in the first place? We visit them because they are authentic and because we can share a moment in time feeling what it is like to be part of a community and part of its culture, but when we undermine the very qualities that draw us to visit communities in the first place, that is when we need to step back and question some of the market forces at play. I went to Cornwall this summer with my children and greatly enjoyed playing in fishing villages along the coast, but we kept asking what the black boxes with the combination locks on every single last door were actually for. There was a creeping sense that the authenticity of many places were being hollowed out by near universal short-term letting of every single residential property. When I wander around the East Newke fishing villages, I see little black key boxes steadily increasing as well. Fife is the second highest number of self-catering properties in Scotland, which is a good indicator of a growing tourism economy, but we also need to be mindful of striking a balance. There is not a right or wrong answer here. It is about careful judgment, but we need to first understand how big the short-term letting sector is and what it brings to communities in terms of benefits and disbenefits. Then we need to have the right tools to mould the growth of the sector in a way that does not compromise the quality of life of residents and to ensure that it makes a fair contribution to the local economy. Graham Simpson I thank Mark Ruskell for taking the intervention. Would he agree with myself and Ben Macpherson that we need to establish the actual scale of the problem before we decide on any action? Mark Ruskell I would say that the best way to establish the scale of the problem is to give councils the right regulatory powers. If you give a power to a council under land use classes, then that will force the investigation. It will force a conversation in communities about the impacts of short-term letting sector, both positive and negative. Let us start with the power. In the East Newkirk of Fife alone, there are 500 self-catering properties registered with the assessor that are eligible for rates relief, most of which, of course, do not pay council tax either. Through non-domestic rates relief alone, that equates to £0.5 million lost in tax revenue every year. Alongside that, there is also the informal unregistered short-term letting sector using online platforms in the East Newk, which could also be bigger than the registered sector. The combined loss of public revenue could be spent, for example, on reopening St Andrew's Rail Route, which would bring huge benefits to both visitors, a tourism economy and locals alike. In terms of the impact on housing availability and quality of life, I agree that that needs a more detailed local conversation, but in order to get there we need to give councils the powers under planning use class orders. This move would put short-term letting on to a better, spatially planned footing, one that makes it transparent and accountable while recognising the positive economic impact that it can have. Councils already exercised powers to cap the number of houses of multiple occupancy in student areas, for example. A move that, I would argue, is far more controversial than any cap on short-term lets, because students are in genuine housing need and are members of communities rather than just visitors for the weekend. Likewise, on alcohol licensing, boards can consider policies on overprovision and limit licences. If we are prejudicing public safety in an area through overprovision of alcohol sales, then licences can be declined according to lines on a map. Councils routinely make decisions to allow the economy to grow in a way that does not undermine the fabric of communities and their needs. If we want to protect our communities as authentic and beautiful places to both live and visit, we need to heed the concerns in Andy Wightman's motion and give councils the powers to get that balance right. Gordon Lindhurst will be followed by Kezia Dugdale. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. May I begin by referring to my interest as a registered landlord within the Lothlian region, which I represent, although I am not engaged within the short-term letting market? I have myself lived in flats in this great city of Edinburgh on and off for many years and have personal experience of the irresponsible behaviour that others sometimes engage in. Loud noise at late hours of the night, rubbish left in stairwells, lack of respect to fellow residents and other antisocial behaviour that Andy Wightman has already referred to. It can be both frustrating and at times life-destroying for those who suffer from this. Such behaviour is of course not limited just to those who stay for only a night or two, but I think that it is fair to say that a very different relationship does come to exist between long-term residents and those others who may pass like ships in the night. One of the most important aspects of democracy, in my view, is for members of the public to exercise the right to contact their elected representatives. I would like to thank all those who have written to me about this issue since I was elected, from places as far apart as Marchman, Brunsfield, Markiston and South Queensferry. As Andy Wightman has pointed out, issues raised by short-term lets are not entirely new, but because I recognised the importance of this issue, I was happy to support his motion, which raises awareness here in Parliament and more widely of this important issue. Positive points, of course, should be made. Edinburgh and Scotland are very successful tourist destinations. Short-term lets are a lucrative business in Edinburgh and a testament to the popularity of our city for tourism, but we need to strike a better balance between Edinburgh's popularity and the unwanted consequences of that success. Many residents feel a sense of loss of community. Relationships that are built up over time in a stairwell of flats, for example, are something that they used to cherish, but now can only crave. Short-term tenants are not around for long and little, if any, relationship is built up. There have been ideas that have been generated about how we can overcome those problems. For example, the Government's own expert advisory panel on the collaborative economy may provide insight into how policy makers can overcome some of the resulting social problems that we have talked about. Government, Parliament and stakeholders should work together to enable informed decisions to be made in addressing concerns without shutting down the short-term letting market altogether. Over-regulation, of course, could have that effect. Making it harder to navigate red tape as a host could impact on the estimated £500 million of economic activity generated in the last year by hosts and guests. Council budgets are continually stretched. Are they ready to take on the administrative role of dealing with the new use classes order, for example, or short-term let planning applications? Those are just some of the questions that we need to think about on this issue. In closing, we should respond, but we should also guard against over-reaction, over-regulation or anything that would be mere window dressing with measures that sound good but do not have the desired effect. The last of the open debate contributions, Kezia Dugdale. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I do the obligatory thanks to Andy Wightman for bringing the debate forward this evening. I also go a bit further and commend him on what is an excellent and very thorough piece of work. It demands and needs its own plaudits and its own right, and it is very specific to note how forensic this is a piece of work with regards to the need to look at change of use and how we can better regulate short-term lets across Edinburgh and Scotland. I think that it is worth taking a moment to consider how the Parliament has addressed issues like this before. I have been involved in housing issues in Edinburgh for 10 or 15 years now, back to the days when I was a student activist supporting the student community around houses of multiple occupation. Of course, a piece of legislation brought in to improve the standards of housing was for a time used against young professionals and students in Edinburgh with the idea of quotas, which the Liberal Democrats at the time were proposing in order to limit the density of HMOs within certain communities, which had its merits as an idea, but it was not going to tackle the underlying problems. Then that debate morphed into a debate around party flats in the city. In the last Parliament, Sarah Boyack did a lot of work around party flats in the Grove Street area and, indeed, on the south side of the city. I mention those because what we require is a legal system that is light on its feet, that is light and agile enough to adapt to new and growing circumstances. We could not have anticipated Airbnb when we were putting forward the HMO legislation a few years ago, so it is important that we revisit those laws and consider whether they are fitting for the time. In all of the contributions that I have heard from those who are not as favourable of Andy's proposals, the idea of data scraping has been mentioned. It also filters through all the briefing papers that we have had from Airbnb and the Association for Self-Catering Companies, which are against any further regulation. I would suggest to Graham Simpson and others that people arguing against data scraping perhaps have a vested interest in it. It is very clear to me that there are merits for having quality empirical evidence. We all support that, but the idea that Airbnb might not like us making our own assessments of how many properties are available on Edinburgh demands a degree of greater scrutiny. It is a bit like asking airports to be responsible for their own carbon emissions or, indeed, asking Tories to be responsible for their own tax returns. What we need is independent analysis of the data, but let us not discount what we can see before us. If you spend five minutes on the Airbnb website, for example—I know that other companies are available—you will see the litany of properties across Edinburgh that are available for short-term rent. Some of them are new and can make a bit more progress and then let you in, Graham, because you were kind enough to establish the point, then I will give way. If you look at the website, you will see that there are brand new properties where there are very often wooden floors that should not be there because building regulations have been ignored. There are lots of continual problems around noise. Likewise, there are lots of older properties in tenement buildings with their own cultural awareness around stair management that people visiting for one or three days won't be aware of, and that is where the issues around community are so important. People have to have a bit of give and take and a bit of compromise when they are living at such close quarters, but the problem here is the introduction of profit into this notion of community, which I will develop a bit further once I have taken the member's intervention if he still wants to grant it. You have not got too much longer, Mr Dugdale. I will off very fast. Thank you very much. I will be really quick. I am just confused about what you are saying about the data. Do you agree that we should have accurate data, or are you happy with data scraping? Give you another minute, Mr Dugdale. Thank you. I appreciate it. Of course I want accurate data, but the member has not demonstrated why what has been put before him is in any way inaccurate. His only evidence is from those vested interests involved, so I do not think that it is a black-and-white scenario. The point that I want to make here is about profit. I am very grateful to Andy Wightman for identifying the fact that people using Airbnb and other companies are not paying non-domestic rates, but there is a wider issue about tax here, too. It was George Osborne who said that people could earn additional money from Airbnb without paying any income tax. In fact, they can earn up to £7,500 through letting out a room or their whole property that they own. That needs to be addressed. Furthermore, had we given local authorities the power over a tourist tax, we might be able to apply that tourist tax to people who are participating in that type of letting. Finally, on Andy Wightman's proposal, he references class order arguments about how we could use that to better regulate the system. I have tried that before when we had a debate in the last Parliament around the proliferation of payday loan shops. I tried to introduce a new class order system then so that we could treat those applications differently from other retail use. I found it immensely difficult, but I would very much like to discuss that further with the member in this chamber or beyond it. I wish him well. It is an excellent proposal. It has the support of a vast number of constituents who have contacted me, and I will do anything that I can to support Andy Wightman's proposals as they go forward. Before I call the minister, can I remind members that evening members' debates would be helpful if they would use the full names of colleagues, because that helps the official report, and it also brings clarity to those who might be listening in. I will now call Kevin Stewart to conclude the debate. Around seven minutes, please, minister. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Thank you to Andy Wightman for bringing the debate to the chamber today. I welcome this opportunity to close the debate for the Government. The debate itself has raised a number of serious issues that merit discussion, and none of us want to see any situation where a rise in short-term lets leads to the displacement of residents or the erosion of communities. The accessibility and ease of technology has led to the rise in online platforms, which have made it much easier for individuals to market their accommodation. That has broadened the type of accommodation for visitors to Scotland and across the world. The new model of tourist accommodation is now an established part of the overall short-term offering provided both online and offline. We must be aware of the downsides of the growth in short-term lets, such as those that we have heard about today and that I have heard about previously, which give rise to concern. I, of course, take that very seriously. I myself represent a city centre seat. Anti-social behaviour and noise nuisance are a loss of a sense of community, a loss of immunity in the area, and all the possible negative impacts that there can be on the fabrics of our towns have all been discussed here today. Local authorities already have powers, quite comprehensive powers, to deal with anti-social behaviour and noise nuisance, and I expect them to use those powers effectively. As recently as 2011, we passed an order in this Parliament to take a kind of houses used for holiday purposes. The anti-social behaviour notices houses used for holiday purposes Scotland order 2011. I wonder how often that is being used here in Edinburgh and elsewhere. I would challenge the local authority to look at using that and other anti-social behaviour powers, as well as noise powers and environmental health powers that they currently have at their disposal. I urge them to use them now to deal with some of the difficulties that folk are actually facing today. That is a very welcome point, minister. I wonder whether you would recognise that those powers can only be actively used if they are properly resourced. Historically, in Edinburgh, we did have anti-social behaviour teams. We had a noise helpline and a hotline. In fact, we had wardens to address that, and all of those have gone because of cuts to local authorities, because they are not a statutory requirement. They were the first thing to go. Surely, we need resources in order to use those laws actively. Kevin Stewart Local authorities are responsible for the use of resources. I think that local authorities have the responsibility to respond to their residents. Obviously, as has been highlighted, that is an issue for many people in Edinburgh. I would ask Edinburgh City to look very carefully at what it is doing in those regards. Mr Wightman was wanting to come in. Andy Wightman Thank you, minister, for taking the intervention. I accept what you say, but the problem with short-term lets, of course, is that by the time somebody phones up the council and they visit or whatever, often the visitor is gone, or if they are not gone, they are going the next day. In the next week, there is another issue, and they phone the council, and by the time they come, they have gone. Those powers are valuable, but they are not particularly helpful when you have a market that is expanding so rapidly. Kevin Stewart I think that those powers are maybe not being applied properly, and that is the difficulty in all of this. I will certainly discuss that with Edinburgh City Council, because that notice itself, the anti-social behaviour order is not served in the people who are there, who are necessarily causing it, but served in the landlord. I think that that is extremely important. The issue of folk being away, etc., should not affect that in any way, shape or form. It is a notice that can be served on the landlord, and I think that that is important. The issues around short-term lets are complex, and we need to understand them properly if we are to put in place effective measures to tackle those problems. That is why the Government commissioned research on short-term lets earlier on this year. That is why we have asked the Scottish expert panel on the collaborative economy to consider the impact of growth and peer-to-peer accommodation through collaborative online platforms, not just in relation to the contribution to Scotland's economy and the opportunities that it presents, but to consider any regulatory, economic and social challenges that arise from those changes. The expert panel is chaired by Helen Gouldin of the Young Foundation, and it will ensure that the wider economic, social and community impacts of the collaborative economy, including taxation, social inclusion and employment conditions, are taken into account. The remit of that inquiry is the collaborative peer-to-peer economy, where someone rents a room in their flat to somebody else who is visiting the city. As I made clear in my opening remarks, that is not the focus of my concern. The focus of my concern is whole residential properties being converted to short-term lets for commercial use. That is not the collaborative economy, that is the exploitative economy. I understand exactly where Mr Wightman is coming from, but I think that this work needs to go forward. I will look at other evidence as well. Mr Wightman knows, Presiding Officer, that I am a pretty pragmatic man when it comes to certain things. I will look at other evidence as well, but I think that it is very important that we see the findings from the group, which is looking at not just an urban setting but a rural setting. I see members from rural constituencies here, and Airbnb and other platforms like it are vital to the survival of the tourism industry in certain parts of Scotland. We have got to get that balance absolutely right, and I look forward to their findings. The Government also recognises the intrinsic links between building housing and inclusive growth and providing warm and affordable homes in tackling inequalities and poverty. Increasing housing supply across all 10 years is a priority for the Government, and that is why we are investing £3 billion during this Parliament to deliver at least 50,000 affordable homes. As well as working towards this bold and ambitious target, we are also working to increase the supply of homes through our wide-ranging review of the planning system to improve its effectiveness. There is no doubt that the increase in the use of whole properties in cities and in rural areas for short-term lets is a direct response to our thriving tourism industry. Just a few months ago, we saw rough guide readers vote on Scotland the most beautiful country in the world. In 2016, we welcomed 2.7 million overseas visitors and 11.5 million domestic visitors to our cities and to our unique countryside. That, of course, generates £11 billion of economic activity and supports some 2,17,000 jobs across the country, including 34,600 here in Edinburgh. We need to take account of the tourism-related industries and their importance in the city and across Scotland. Scotland's economy benefits hugely from tourism, but it should not be at the expense of local communities. I will say that again—it should not be at the expense of local communities. We need to find a way to continue to welcome visitors to our beautiful country, offering them safe accommodation that is good quality while ensuring that local residents can continue to live and work in our town centres and our rural communities. The Scottish expert panel on the collaborative economy will report to ministers at the end of this year. I am sure that we will all be interested in its conclusions and want to carefully consider what planning, fiscal or regulatory measures would enable local government to provide effective controls over the change of use of residential property to short-term let property. I once again thank Mr Wightman for the opportunity that I have had to address the chamber today.