Hansard

In 2022, the then Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Housing and Local Government acknowledged that point. That is why we moved on to select a delivery model. I will touch more on the pace as I go through my speech.

The programme has accumulated a significant amount of knowledge and understanding of the significant impact that potentially unsafe cladding is having on people’s lives, and of the lived experience of the barriers that we face in tackling the issue. The real-life experiences of all those who are affected by the risks and consequences of unsafe cladding are the impetus behind the provisions in the bill.

We need to remove any obstacles to progressing the necessary work that the Government and developers must do in the interests of public safety. However, it is equally important that the public has absolute confidence in the assessment and resulting works; in the ability and willingness of developers to participate in the remediation programme; and in the assurance arising from the completion of the works.

I turn to the scope of the assessment arrangements in the bill. The ministerial working group on mortgage lending and cladding was mindful of the complications that the Scottish tenure system would present to a programme such as ours and the potential far-reaching consequences of adapting the legal basis for the assessments. Such adaptations rightly require considerable examination and deliberation. The solution, therefore, is a basis for assessing all the risks that are presented by a building as a whole. Using established fire risk assessment methodology, it will be possible to specify criteria by which the fire safety risks of a whole building can be assessed. That work is in hand.

Last autumn, I commissioned a task and finish group to look at the single building assessment specification. I have agreed that PAS—publicly available specification—9980 will be the basis of the fire risk appraisal of external walls, albeit that it will be tailored to the Scottish context. We recognise that that is a critical enabler in setting the standard and propelling the pace of the programme.

The SBA specification is in development. It will include that component and a fire risk assessment, which will survey the internal fire safety measures, including internal compartmentation of buildings. Without a doubt, the highest standards of competence should be employed in carrying out the assessment of buildings. To that end, the bill seeks the power to specify the competency levels of those who undertake the SBA. Developers continue to be closely involved in discussions about the SBA and the specification through the SBA task and finish group. We are also engaging with other stakeholders on the development of that specification.

Reflecting our overwhelming desire and duty to protect life, we seek powers to prioritise access to buildings to carry out assessment and remediation. Indeed, our programme furthers the rights of both owners and occupiers to peaceful enjoyment of their property. We have assessed the impacts of the legislation and are satisfied that it fulfils our intentions in a compliant manner to ensure that there is an appropriate opportunity to challenge decisions. Stefano Pessina from Mizu Tenants Committee welcomed the bill, stating:

“It is good that it contains steps to stop residents who are owners who are perhaps blocking progress at the moment”. —[Official Report, Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee, 23 January 2024; c 9.]

These powers are not sought lightly, and have been developed in the context of cladding specifically, and in direct response to barriers that were experienced during the pilot phase of our programme.

I turn to the cladding assurance register. Where an SBA report identifies risks to human life associated with a building’s external wall cladding system and works to mitigate or eliminate those risks, that building must be remediated accordingly.

The cladding assurance register is intended to be a record of buildings that have been through the single building assessment process and for which satisfactory remediation works identified in that assessment have, where required, been completed. That is key in ensuring that an accurate record of remediation works that are undertaken is maintained, and that those with an interest, such as lenders and insurers, can understand, and take assurance from, the scope of the works that are undertaken in each building.

I am conscious that the committee, as part of its consideration of the bill, raised a number of questions as to whether there could be merit in adding buildings to the register ahead of remediation works being completed. The register is not intended to highlight existing risks from cladding ahead of remediation, and I am mindful that that approach could, in fact, be counterproductive.?It is a long-standing principle of the programme that we do not release details of buildings or of any assessment or remediation works that are being undertaken in relation to them. That approach is in line with requests from?home owners and residents in order to protect their privacy and safety, and it reflects engagement with the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service on how best we ensure safety and security.

I am also aware that the committee heard evidence that the cladding assurance register could be broadened to reflect wider issues of building or fire safety. My current view is that the register is, and must remain, focused on the risks that are posed by unsafe cladding and the remediation that is required to address that risk in order to preserve that internally consistent knowledge. That is the purpose of the bill.

We will of course reflect on the views and suggestions that have been shared ahead of stage 2 consideration of the bill, and we will engage directly with relevant stakeholders, including the Association of British Insurers, UK Finance, the SFRS and the High Rise Scotland Action Group, to understand how best to maximise the positive impacts of the register on their roles in the industry and in people’s lives.

I should add that financial services, including mortgage lending, are a reserved matter and that the Scottish Government will continue to raise with the United Kingdom Government the difficulties that are experienced by owners and prospective owners in accessing lending on buildings with potentially unsafe cladding.

I confirm that the Government intends to issue letters of confirmation to home owners of orphan buildings within the current pilot scheme. Developers, too, benefit from the register; they get the opportunity to restore public confidence in the safety of their buildings and the reputations of those who construct and refurbish them.

We have created in the legislation conditions under which developers can fully participate in remediation. The responsible developers scheme that we intend to create through secondary legislation will set the stage for developers to engage with our programme in the most constructive way. The UK Government has already established a responsible actors scheme, which has similar aims. Developers want to participate, as evidenced by the nine developer commitment letters that have been signed.

Naturally, we want to protect our construction industry from a tumultuous market, which is why we are looking to create a responsible developers scheme that can be flexible in the face of economic circumstances. We intend to use the scheme to ensure that a proportionate approach is taken, and that that is clearly spelled out, to ensure that developers accept their responsibilities and that we as the Government display our accountability to the public.