Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 17 March 2011
17 Mar 2011 · S3 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Private Rented Housing (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3
I recognise the work that Alex Neil has done to make the bill better, but if I had been given a penny every time I heard a minister say at the last minute at stage 3 that there was a better way to achieve something, I would be a rich woman. There is not a better way to achieve what amendment 1 seeks, and I will briefly say why.
I am afraid that Sandra White has misread section 17, which relates to statutory notices. Local authorities will not use that section to deal with the issue, for a simple reason. Robert Brown made the important point that when a licensing committee considers whether to grant an HMO licence, it needs to know what it is looking for. It is crucial that we place the issues of subdivision and adaptations higher up in licensing committees’ thinking when they are applying section 131 of the 2006 act. I know that Sandra White is sympathetic to amendment 1, but she is wrong, in that the issue needs to be dealt with before a landlord is granted a licence in the first place.
Let me address the issues that Patrick Harvie raised. Good landlords—I put it on record that there are many of them—do not tend to cram tenants into subdivided rooms with no light. The University of Glasgow students representative council came to me this week and gave its support for amendment 1. Members might have received an e-mail from the SRC on the issue. The reason for that is that students across Glasgow have been crammed into such rooms for one reason or another. That tells me that local authorities do not use their discretion.
The issue is nothing to do with granting a power; instead, it is to do with giving local authorities reasons, if they so wish, to reject a licence application when the subdivision of rooms would mean that tenants would get a poor deal or the property would be a poor HMO. If Alex Neil supports the general intention, I do not see what is wrong with adding to section 131. He says that the local authority can take into account the location, the condition, any amenities and the possibility of undue public nuisance, but that is not clear enough.
All I am asking is for the Government to add two things to that list, so that if local authorities want to reject licences because of stacked services and subdivisions, they can do so. There have been cases in which the sheriff refused to uphold the decision of the local authority because the decision was made on those grounds. We are making law here, so I ask members to make the law clear. We will not have another chance to do this. I plead with members: they have nothing to lose if they support amendment 1, and I ask them to do so.
I am afraid that Sandra White has misread section 17, which relates to statutory notices. Local authorities will not use that section to deal with the issue, for a simple reason. Robert Brown made the important point that when a licensing committee considers whether to grant an HMO licence, it needs to know what it is looking for. It is crucial that we place the issues of subdivision and adaptations higher up in licensing committees’ thinking when they are applying section 131 of the 2006 act. I know that Sandra White is sympathetic to amendment 1, but she is wrong, in that the issue needs to be dealt with before a landlord is granted a licence in the first place.
Let me address the issues that Patrick Harvie raised. Good landlords—I put it on record that there are many of them—do not tend to cram tenants into subdivided rooms with no light. The University of Glasgow students representative council came to me this week and gave its support for amendment 1. Members might have received an e-mail from the SRC on the issue. The reason for that is that students across Glasgow have been crammed into such rooms for one reason or another. That tells me that local authorities do not use their discretion.
The issue is nothing to do with granting a power; instead, it is to do with giving local authorities reasons, if they so wish, to reject a licence application when the subdivision of rooms would mean that tenants would get a poor deal or the property would be a poor HMO. If Alex Neil supports the general intention, I do not see what is wrong with adding to section 131. He says that the local authority can take into account the location, the condition, any amenities and the possibility of undue public nuisance, but that is not clear enough.
All I am asking is for the Government to add two things to that list, so that if local authorities want to reject licences because of stacked services and subdivisions, they can do so. There have been cases in which the sheriff refused to uphold the decision of the local authority because the decision was made on those grounds. We are making law here, so I ask members to make the law clear. We will not have another chance to do this. I plead with members: they have nothing to lose if they support amendment 1, and I ask them to do so.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Trish Godman)
Lab
The next item of business is stage 3 proceedings on the Private Rented Housing (Scotland) Bill. In dealing with amendments, members should have the bill as a...
The Deputy Presiding Officer
Lab
Group 1 is on minor and technical amendments. Amendment 3, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendments 4 to 6 and 11 to 14.
The Minister for Housing and Communities (Alex Neil)
SNP
The amendments in this group are minor drafting amendments that make slight changes to the wording of a few sections in order to clarify some expressions, re...
The Deputy Presiding Officer
Lab
I call Ted Brocklebank.
Ted Brocklebank (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Con
I am sorry, but I did not ask to speak on this group.
The Deputy Presiding Officer
Lab
I am sorry about that. Your name came up on the screen.Amendment 3 agreed to.Section 8—Disqualification orders for unregistered landlordsAmendment 4 moved—Al...
The Deputy Presiding Officer
Lab
Group 2 is on refusal to consider an application for a licence to operate a house in multiple occupation. Amendment 7, in the name of the minister, is groupe...
Alex Neil
SNP
The amendments relate to the proposed power for a local authority to refuse to consider an application for an HMO licence when it considers that use of the p...
Pauline McNeill (Glasgow Kelvin) (Lab)
Lab
It is important to draw that distinction and clarify that a refusal to consider a licence application is not a refusal of the licence. Will the minister conf...
Alex Neil
SNP
I confirm that landlords cannot operate an HMO until they receive a licence to do so.Amendments 9 and 10 are consequential and remove provisions that amendme...
The Deputy Presiding Officer
Lab
Group 3 is on the suitability of living accommodation for an HMO licence. Amendment 1, in the name of Pauline McNeill, is the only amendment in the group.
Pauline McNeill
Lab
Amendment 1 deals with a continuing issue about which the Local Government and Communities Committee heard evidence. It relates to HMOs in which rooms have b...
Sandra White (Glasgow) (SNP)
SNP
On amendment 1, I sympathise with Pauline McNeill’s views, as I did at stage 1. I also recognise the public nuisance provision in the 2006 act.I thank the mi...
Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD)
LD
I very strongly support Pauline McNeill’s amendment 1. I understand the point about section 17, but I do not feel that it deals with the issue in a satisfact...
Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green)
Green
I would like to support Pauline McNeill’s amendment 1, but I wonder whether she could address one or two issues in her closing speech. We all know that her c...
Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow Maryhill) (Lab)
Lab
I, too, have been lobbied by many organisations, both within and outside my constituency. For the avoidance of doubt, I put my mind to the point that Patrick...
Alex Neil
SNP
We are all trying to achieve the same objective. The issue is the best way to achieve it. As Pauline McNeill stated, her amendment 1 would introduce subdivis...
Pauline McNeill
Lab
I recognise the work that Alex Neil has done to make the bill better, but if I had been given a penny every time I heard a minister say at the last minute at...
The Deputy Presiding Officer
Lab
I take it that you wish to press amendment 1.
Pauline McNeill
Lab
Yes, I am happy to press it.
The Deputy Presiding Officer
Lab
The question is, that amendment 1 be agreed to. Are we agreed?Members: No.
The Deputy Presiding Officer
Lab
There will be a five-minute suspension followed by the division.15:20 Meeting suspended. 15:25 On resuming—
The Deputy Presiding Officer
SNP
We come to the division on amendment 1.ForAdam, Brian (Aberdeen North) (SNP) Aitken, Bill (Glasgow) (Con) Alexander, Ms Wendy (Paisley North) (Lab) Allan, Al...
The Deputy Presiding Officer
SNP
The result of the division is: For 119, Against 0, Abstentions 0.Amendment 1 agreed to.
The Deputy Presiding Officer
SNP
Group 4 is on refusal to grant an HMO licence: overprovision. Amendment 15, in the name of Ted Brocklebank, is the only amendment in the group.
Ted Brocklebank
Con
In speaking to amendment 15, I pay tribute to Suscoms—Sustainable Communities (Scotland)—which first alerted the Public Petitions Committee to a variety of p...
Margo MacDonald (Lothians) (Ind)
Ind
I want to say how much I appreciate amendment 15; I congratulate Ted Brocklebank on lodging it. We will sorely miss him, but the amendment will be a good tes...
Ted Brocklebank
Con
I am very grateful to Margo MacDonald for her kind words.I draw members’ attention to the situation in St Andrews, which I may have mentioned before. The cor...
Iain Smith (North East Fife) (LD)
LD
I have some concerns about amendment 15, on which I seek clarification from the minister and from Ted Brocklebank. They relate, in particular, to subsection ...
Patrick Harvie
Green
I have more serious concerns about amendment 15 than I had about amendment 1. Perhaps it would be unfortunate to interpret what Ted Brocklebank said in this ...