Hansard

First, I thank the bill team for its help and guidance, and I thank the wider cladding team. They have been a fantastic help to me, so I express my personal thanks to them. I am also grateful to members for their contributions to the debate, which I will touch on in a second.

Today’s discussion has been highly constructive, as has been the case throughout the bill process. I know that members on all sides of the chamber are committed to safeguarding home owners and residents from the dangers that unsafe cladding poses. That has been evident in the co-operation and collaboration that have helped to shape the bill. I want that to continue—I genuinely mean that—and I give my commitment that I will work together with members on the points that have been raised in the discussion and those that are outstanding as we move forward with the remediation programme. The debate has explored a number of issues and, as I said before, my door is open for discussing them.

I will thank some people specifically. I have mentioned Kaukab Stewart and Pam Duncan-Glancy, but there are others. I thank Miles Briggs and Graham Simpson for their work and collaboration. I thank Ariane Burgess, the convener of the committee, for the work that she carried out. I thank Pam Duncan-Glancy, as I said, and Ben Macpherson, whom I have met with his constituents on a couple of occasions. My special thanks go to him and to Deirdre Brock, who was involved in that, too. Finally, I again offer special thanks to Kaukab Stewart for the work that she has carried out.

I will touch on some of the points that were raised during the debate. I come first to Miles Briggs. I am happy to take up the issue of orphaned buildings—I think that we gave a commitment that those would not be on a lower rung, but I am happy to discuss that with him.

Issues of building safety have been raised by a number of members, and I am happy to engage with them individually or through the committee on that point. I am happy to liaise on that issue, which is important.

Mark Griffin touched on a number of things, including the legislation. The progress has to quicken—I have acknowledged that—and the bill is the first stage of that. On secondary legislation, one of the key things that I said at the start was that we are trying to be held to account so that we are reporting back. Again, I am happy to meet him, either through our regular meetings or through the committee. He has my commitment that I will meet him to discuss how we can develop secondary legislation and timescales. I am happy to continue discussing those issues with him.

Ariane Burgess made an important point about skills issues. We have had meetings with building safety and fire safety colleagues. At the moment, they think that they have the capacity to deal with the issues, but we need to keep an eye on that. Ariane Burgess’s point is very valid.

Willie Rennie mentioned the communication process, which is very important. During the debate, we touched on how important it is that residents know about the process at its start, including what the likely timescales are.

One of the key things that I worked on with Graham Simpson was the reporting process, and I need to be held to account on that. That is important, and I am happy to work with him on that by looking at deadlines. Jeremy Balfour also touched on that.

Willie Coffey talked about the case in Irvine, and I will come on to the points that Richard Leonard made about a historic case from a number of years ago. We have to learn from that and take into account the wider consideration of building safety.

Jeremy Balfour talked about the start of the process. I would not say that we are quite at the start of the process, but the bill allows us to quicken the pace, which is really important. He also made an important point about surveyors and fire engineers, and he raised the issue of secondary legislation, which I am happy to discuss with him or at committee.

Richard Leonard touched on some of the historic cases going back a number of years, and he hit the nail on the head, for me, when he said that, although we can talk about this subject in the chamber, it is a basic right to have a safe home. That has to guide us all. It certainly will guide me, and it is something from today’s debate that will stick with me.

Pam Duncan-Glancy talked about the number of buildings on which work has been completed, and I will continue to work closely with her on that issue.

Ben Macpherson made a point about collaboration, particularly with regard to mortgages and insurance. I will continue to work collaboratively with the UK Government on that matter. We have raised it before and we will raise it again.

I am grateful to all members who contributed to the progress of the bill in the weeks and months leading up to today and for the broad support for it from across the chamber. I know that Parliament and the most important people in all this—the residents, owners and stakeholders—want to see an increase in the pace of cladding remediation in Scotland, and I desperately want to see that, too.

I believe that the bill provides a strong foundation on which to accelerate the operational delivery of our cladding remediation programme and aims to deliver for those who are affected by unsafe cladding in our communities and constituencies. I commend the motion in my name, and I very much hope that members will vote for it tonight.