Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Committee

Communities Committee, 05 Oct 2005

05 Oct 2005 · S2 · Communities Committee

Item of business

Housing (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Scanlon, Mary Con Highlands and Islands Watch on SPTV

I thank my colleagues for contributing to the debate, which has been helpful. The minister's response has also been helpful.Christine Grahame asked to whom the surveyor will be responsible and answerable. That is a problem. If the seller pays for the survey, will the buyer automatically have a right to the information? Is the surveyor accountable and responsible to all the buyers as well as to the seller? That has not been made clear.Christine Grahame said that the single survey does not replace the need for multiple surveys, but Scott Barrie seems to think that it will. In recent years there has been an enormous increase in the number of offers subject to survey. My daughter bought a house recently. I thought that such offers would put the buyer at a disadvantage, but it seems to be common practice. The market is beginning to correct itself.John Home Robertson mentioned problems such as dampness, the need for rewiring and so on. I agree with his point and I commend him for his commitment to affordable housing.Scott Barrie said that the single survey will improve the fabric, energy efficiency and state of repair of properties, but I refer him to the Arneil Johnston report, which states:"it appears that generally sellers carry out only minor/general repairs or improvements and respondents indicated they would have done this regardless of the Single Survey".I should also say something about the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors. In evidence to the committee it said that it would work positively with whatever system emerges. I do not know whether I made the point inaccurately, but the surveyors said that the survey would not have a positive impact on the condition and energy efficiency of property in the private sector. It is misleading to assume that surveyors just want to line their own pockets. That view came from quite a few people, but it is wrong. The RICS has taken a balanced, considered and measured approach that addresses the entire rationale for the changes.The minister said that there has to be change. I agree. I may be a Conservative, but I do not believe that everything has to be conserved. We live in a world of change and I embrace change, but I embrace it only when proven research and evidence show it to be an improvement. I am not averse to change, but we must introduce change that we know will make an improvement and will be for the better. Of course the decision to legislate is for ministers. I never implied in any shape or form that the steering group should make decisions on legislation. The Parliament has a good reputation for consulting; we have a good reputation for including individuals, groups, organisations and other interests in Scotland. It is a real slap in the face to get all these experts round the table to consult them, to liaise with them, to work in partnership with them and seek their advice only to announce that something will be compulsory without first discussing it with them. That is not how we should legislate in this Parliament. I therefore press amendment 75.

Search Hansard contributions

Communities Committee, 05 Oct 2005

In the same item of business