Holyrood, made browsable

Hansard

Every contribution to the Official Report — chamber and committee — searchable in one place. Pulled from data.parliament.scot, indexed for full-text search, linked through to every MSP.

129
Current MSPs
415
MSPs ever elected
13
Parties on record
2,355,091
Hansard contributions
1999–2026
Coverage span
Official Report

Search Hansard contributions

Clear
Showing 0 of 2,355,091 contributions in session S6, 17 Apr 2026 – 17 May 2026. Latest 30 days: 148. Coverage: 12 May 1999 — 14 May 2026.

No contributions match those filters.

← Back to list
Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 08 January 2026 [Draft]

08 Jan 2026 · S6 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Building Safety Levy (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Smith, Liz Con Mid Scotland and Fife Watch on SPTV

No, I do not entirely accept that. The bill is a specific, Scotland-centred bill and we, as Scottish parliamentarians, have to take a decision on its merits. That is the basis on which I am making these points.

Along with my colleagues on the Finance and Public Administration Committee, I listened very carefully to witnesses, who provided us with extensive written and oral evidence across three different evidence sessions before Christmas. As set out in the committee’s report, there was unanimous concern—including from Mr Mason—about several key aspects of the bill and the negative externalities that are likely to result. As colleagues know, it is unusual for a committee not to fully endorse the general principles of a bill. However, on this occasion, it has not endorsed them, and for good reason.

As the convener said, the major issue is the likely impact on the housing market, which, as we all know, has already been facing significant challenges for quite some time. The most significant concern among witnesses and members of the committee was the fact that the bill could reduce house-building capacity, because it would make certain sites unviable and thereby have a detrimental effect on the ability to deliver much-needed affordable housing. Homes for Scotland estimated that the levy would probably add around £3,500 to the cost of building a new home, and Bancon Homes told us that it would have an impact of up to 20 per cent on its profit margins. Those are not inconsiderable fiscal effects.

Different but nonetheless related are the potential effects on rural Scotland, where depopulation is already a significant problem. I have heard the minister’s concerns about some of the rurality issues, but several factors have already combined to create a very complex situation for rural housing. House prices are often high in relation to local incomes in rural areas, and there is a shortage of housing that is suitable for families, which means, sadly, that too many families choose to move away. The combination of that, the weak infrastructure that we find in rural areas in relation to accessibility of transport and the internet and the complexities in the planning process means that we encounter major challenges. Scottish Land & Estates told us that the cost of delivering rural housing could be almost double that of mainstream housing. That must be a serious concern. That is on top of a lot of the other issues that affect rural areas, such as the farm tax, national insurance charges and various other aspects of tourism and hospitality. That whole combination is a very serious matter for the rural sector.

Although there appeared, in some quarters, to be an understanding of the problem, particularly in relation to the islands issue, part of it is that we do not have a clear definition of what rurality is, and there are accompanying inconsistencies. I hope that the minister means what he said today and in committee, which is that he is prepared to lodge some amendments.

There is likely to be a disproportionate effect on smaller developers, owing to the fact that they will inevitably find it more difficult to absorb the necessary costs. The Scottish Property Federation was extremely clear about that. There was also concern that the bill could have a detrimental impact on those who want to build over a long period of time, such as the build-to-rent sector, as the financial returns there take longer to be realised.

Much of the debate among stakeholders was about how to address the issue of the polluter-pays principle. They worry that those who have acted responsibly will end up footing the bill for the levy. I think that it is worse than that, because some responsible builders will go well beyond the basic safety regulations, and they are the ones who will have to pick up the tab, whereas those who have not been responsible can, to some extent, get away with it.

The committee is unanimously concerned, for very good reasons, about some of the macroeconomic effects of the bill. Once again, I think that the Parliament is faced with a Scottish Government bill that, although well intentioned, nonetheless has very significant problems. On that basis, the Conservatives cannot support it at stage 1.

15:24  

In the same item of business

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Liam McArthur) LD
The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-20285, in the name of Ivan McKee, on the Building Safety Levy (Scotland) Bill at stage 1. I invite member...
The Minister for Public Finance (Ivan McKee) SNP
The tragic events at Grenfell tower in 2017 shocked us all and highlighted the need to address the issue of unsafe cladding across all four nations of the Un...
Craig Hoy (South Scotland) (Con) Con
I understand the financial pressures that the Scottish Government is facing, but it has already received nearly £100 million specifically for cladding remedi...
Ivan McKee SNP
I have been clear in the numbers that I have just indicated that between £1.7 billion and £3.1 billion will be required for cladding remediation. That money ...
Stephen Kerr (Central Scotland) (Con) Con
I think that the minister may have misunderstood Craig Hoy’s question. He was asking about the £97.1 million that the Government received from the Treasury f...
Ivan McKee SNP
The member is aware that that money will all be spent on cladding remediation. Of course, we first need to identify the buildings and go through the proper p...
John Mason (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Ind
I thank the minister for being generous with his time. How would he respond to those who say that not all developers are guilty in the use of cladding and th...
Ivan McKee SNP
I have already indicated that the amount that we are asking developers to pay is a small percentage of the total bill for cladding—I will come on to talk abo...
Michelle Thomson (Falkirk East) (SNP) SNP
Will the minister take an intervention?
Ivan McKee SNP
Do I have time, Presiding Officer?
The Deputy Presiding Officer LD
I can give you the time back, minister.
Michelle Thomson SNP
I appreciate that, and I will be very quick. In relation to the minister’s comment that no further proposals were forthcoming, does the minister accept that ...
Ivan McKee SNP
The Government will, of course, listen to people who come forward with proposals, and it is no secret that that work has been under way for a period of time....
The Deputy Presiding Officer LD
I call Kenneth Gibson to speak on behalf of the Finance and Public Administration Committee, for around eight minutes. 15:09
Kenneth Gibson (Cunninghame North) (SNP) SNP
I am pleased to speak on behalf of the Finance and Public Administration Committee, which was the lead committee for stage 1 scrutiny of the Building Safety ...
Liz Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Con
Nobody could possibly doubt the far-reaching implications of the most appalling human tragedy at Grenfell tower in 2017, nor the importance of ensuring that ...
John Mason Ind
I agree with Liz Smith in that I am not wildly enthusiastic about the package, but does she accept that Westminster has put us in a corner and we do not have...
Liz Smith Con
No, I do not entirely accept that. The bill is a specific, Scotland-centred bill and we, as Scottish parliamentarians, have to take a decision on its merits....
Mark Griffin (Central Scotland) (Lab) Lab
It is no small thing for a committee to fail to support a bill at stage 1. It happens very rarely in this place, but in this case it is entirely justified. T...
Ivan McKee SNP
I would like some clarification from Mark Griffin. Is it the Labour Party’s position that it does not support taking forward a levy in Scotland in the same w...
The Deputy Presiding Officer LD
Mark Griffin, I will give you the time back.
Mark Griffin Lab
I challenge the assertion that the Scottish Government is taking forward a levy in the same way as the UK Government is. It is not the same policy. I was goi...
Ivan McKee SNP
Mark Griffin says that there is no understanding of the impact on the market; I would argue that there is. Will he explain what analysis of the impact on the...
Mark Griffin Lab
That is a different housing market, and it is an area where the Government has not declared a housing emergency. Ivan McKee’s Government has declared a housi...
Ariane Burgess (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Green
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the stage 1 debate on the Building Safety Levy (Scotland) Bill. I am aware of the issues, having been involved in ...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Annabelle Ewing) SNP
I call Willie Rennie to open on behalf of the Scottish Liberal Democrats. You have a generous six minutes, Mr Rennie. 15:35
Willie Rennie (North East Fife) (LD) LD
The Government has put us in a hellish position today. Who on earth would want to vote against a building safety levy to deal with the many homes that are af...
John Mason Ind
Will the member give way?
Willie Rennie LD
Not just now. The minister knows the answer to that. He knows that a pitifully small amount of money has been spent on dealing with the issue. He knows that...
Michelle Thomson SNP
I have a lot of sympathy with what the member has said so far. However, I point out to him that the residential property developer tax is already in place in...