Meeting of the Parliament 23 September 2025 [Draft]
Every time that we discuss the bill, I will remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests. To be perfectly clear, and so that there is no dubiety, I state that I let houses under private residential tenancy agreements—those are long-term lets—and I give houses to employees as part of their employment contract. I have been in the house-letting industry for more than 30 years, and have let houses under the Housing (Scotland) Act 1998 and the subsequent housing acts that were passed in 2006, 2010 and 2014. I am a qualified surveyor and I let houses on behalf of clients prior to my time as a member of the Scottish Parliament. Given all that, I believe that I come here with some experience.
My amendments 179 to 191, and amendment 258, which is a technical amendment, seek to enable students to query their rents. We all know, particularly those of us who have had children go through university, that the rent that they pay is a huge burden on them and one that they will take through to later life.
The purpose of my amendments, which I lodged on the back of requests from various student bodies that approached me, is to place checks and controls on the rents that are set for student accommodation.
The cabinet secretary was right to say that I lodged similar amendments at stage 2, which were pushed on my behalf. I wanted to bring them back, because I want to ensure that students understand that this Parliament understands the pressure that they face with the rents that they are charged as a result of being at university. The amendments attempt to do that—they are probing amendments, maybe—and I have the support of the students in seeking to make those changes.
I would also like to talk about amendment 221, which is about deposits for non-UK domiciled students. I do not take the point that the cabinet secretary made that it is discriminatory. The fact that such students are charged greater fees than anyone else might be viewed as discriminatory. The amendment is a way to help those students to get accommodation for the simple reason that being a guarantor for somebody is a very difficult and onerous condition to take on. It is very difficult for landlords to accept guarantors if they are outwith the country.
My aim with the amendment is to make it easier for non-UK domiciled students to get a flat by paying more of the rent up front. That would give the landlord more confidence, and it would mean that students would not have to rely on trying to find a guarantor. I would ask the cabinet secretary to consider that carefully, because the amendment is meant to work in the favour of students, not work against them.
On Maggie Chapman’s amendment 220, having been in the industry for 30 years, I take grave exception to the general characterisation that she makes of landlords. That is not my view of landlords. Maybe it is just that I work in the Highlands and in more rural areas, but landlords are not out to make life difficult for tenants. In fact, long-term tenants are much better for landlords than short-term tenants.
Maggie Chapman’s characterisation does the industry a vast injustice. I point out to her that there are 300,000 let properties in Scotland. If we demonise all landlords and get rid of all that accommodation, it will just exacerbate the housing crisis that we face.