Annabelle Ewing
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“Before we turn to the next item of business, I hope that members do not mind if I say a few words. I would like to say specifically what an honour it has been for me to serve in the Scottish Parliament, which, of course, was reconvened by my late mother, Winnie Ewing, in 1999.”
“There is one question to be put as a result of today’s business. The question is, that motion S6M-21180, in the name of John Swinney, on a motion of thanks, be agreed to.”
“I hope that members feel that I have discharged my duty. I thank you for having given me the opportunity to be your Deputy Presiding Officer, along with Mr McArthur, and I wish each of you all the very best.”
“Members! Màiri McAllan: Equally, the prospect of scrapping the land and buildings transaction tax or stamp duty land tax is for the birds, and I am afraid that it demonstrates that the Conservatives realise that their chances of implementing any such policies are, to put it politely, very slim.”
“Motion debated, That the Parliament recognises the importance of sport and activity as a force for good that goes beyond just physical health; considers that they have a significant impact on mental health, as well as contributing to community and national cohesion and wellbeing; believes that sport breaks down barriers of colour, race, r…”
“Motion debated, That the Parliament notes with concern the reported decision by the Lloyds Banking Group to close 11 Bank of Scotland branches between June and July 2026, including the Rutherglen branch; understands that this is the latest in a series of bank closures across the UK; believes that these closures will have a significant imp…”
The complete record
Every one of 792 lines we hold for Annabelle Ewing, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 10 of 16.
“To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of its relations with the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly. (S6O-05026)”
“Motion debated, That the Parliament welcomes the publication of the Scottish Fiscal Commission (SFC) 2025 Fiscal Sustainability Report, which was published on 22 April 2025; notes with concern that the report indicates the potential for growing fiscal pressures over the next 50 years, largely due to the combination of Scotland’s ageing population and increasingly poor public health driving up health spending; understands from the research that health spending, which is already the largest area of spending within the Scottish Budget, is projected to grow from 34% of devolved public spending in 2029-30 to 47% by 2074-75; notes the analysis indicating that, as a result of demographic change, the Scottish Budget will face a significant challenge within the next 20 years unless action is taken soon to address rising levels of preventable illness, including long-term chronic conditions; further notes the view that, without any intervention, the worst case scenario set out by the SFC would leave a future Scottish administration being forced to choose between cuts to the health service or sacrificing other public services to sustain health spending; considers that helping people across Scotland, including in the South Scotland region, to live longer, healthier lives can reduce growth in healthcare costs as the population ages; notes the belief that this can be achieved through the delivery of a robust, preventative health agenda, integrated across multiple policy portfolios, that promotes inclusion, physical activity and good nutrition; further notes the view that it is essential for the Scottish Government to set out how it proposes to address the issues identified in the 2025 Fiscal Sustainability Report, in particular the specific steps that it will take to address the forecast gap resulting from poor public health, and notes the belief that politicians from across the political spectrum must have a shared commitment to improving public health if that goal is to be achieved.”
“The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-17486, in the name of Brian Whittle, on securing the long-term sustainability of Scotland’s health service. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.”
“Motion debated, That the Parliament recognises what it sees as the importance of funded early learning and childcare in giving every child in Scotland the best start in life; believes that funded places have a vital part to play in helping parents return to work and boosting Scotland’s economy; considers that the high cost of childcare is creating real barriers for parents who want to get back into work; understands with regret that many local authorities in the West Scotland region, including Inverclyde Council, North Ayrshire Council and East Dunbartonshire Council, only offer funded places from the start of the term after a child’s third birthday, leaving some families missing out on up to four months of support; considers that this postcode lottery stems from the Scottish Government’s Early Learning and Childcare Statutory Guidance, and notes the calls for the Scottish Government to guarantee that funded places are available from the day after a child’s third birthday, and that children are treated fairly, no matter where they live or when they are born.”
“The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-19090, in the name of Jamie Greene, on addressing the postcode lottery of early learning and childcare provision. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I invite members who wish to speak to press their request-to-speak buttons.”
“The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-19221, in the name of Angela Constance, on the Criminal Justice, Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill at stage 3. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request- to-speak buttons now. 15:43”
“The next item of business is a statement by Angela Constance on Scotland’s prison population. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions. 14:58”
“Good afternoon. The next item of business is portfolio questions, and the portfolio this afternoon is social justice and housing. I remind members that questions 5 and 7 are grouped together. I will therefore take any supplementaries on those questions after both have been answered. Devolved Benefits (Spending) 1.”
“The next item of business is a statement by Jim Fairlie on the urban gulls summit. The minister will take questions at the end of his statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions. 17:11”
“The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-19124, in the name of Katy Clark, on protecting Scotland’s fire service. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons. 16:00”
“Good afternoon. The first item of business this afternoon is portfolio questions, and the first portfolio is rural affairs, land reform and islands. Cockle Fishery (Solway Firth) 1.”
“The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-19027, in the name of Ben Macpherson, on the Tertiary Education and Training (Funding and Governance) (Scotland) Bill at stage 1. 14:57”
“Motion debated, That the Parliament welcomes the reported £10 billion deal for the UK to supply at least five Type 26 class frigates to Norway, which will be built by the Govan and Scotstoun shipyards on the River Clyde in Glasgow; notes with optimism the potential for the largest shipbuilding export deal in Scottish history to secure and create a significant number of highly skilled jobs in the shipbuilding industry and associated advanced manufacturing supply chain; understands that Scotland’s shipyards now hold an orderbook for an expected 18 frigates and 13 Type 26 vessels for the Royal Navy and Royal Norwegian Navy, and five Type 31 vessels for the Royal Navy; further understands that that is the largest surface naval shipbuilding programme in Europe, and that it is rivalled only by those in the United States and China; recognises what it sees as the vital role of this industry to Scotland’s economy; notes calls for the Scottish and UK governments to work collaboratively to aim to ensure that Scotland’s firms and workers are at the forefront of this project, and to maximise the economic benefit and long-term security for communities across Scotland, and further notes the calls on them to consider ways of building on this with a comprehensive national shipbuilding strategy for Scotland that will secure further naval and commercial shipbuilding contracts for the country’s shipyards.”
“The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-18709, in the name of Paul Sweeney, on “Norway selects a Glasgow-built type 26 as its next generation frigate”. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I invite those members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request- to-speak button.”
“We come to group 13, on social housing. Amendment 101, in the name of Paul Sweeney, is grouped with amendments 304, 305, 337 and 338.”
“The Deputy Presiding Officer: I note that no other members have sought to make a contribution. I ask whether the cabinet secretary has anything to add by way of winding up. Màiri McAllan: I have nothing to add. Amendment 178 agreed to. Amendment 6 moved—[Maggie Chapman]. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 6 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division. I will suspend for around five minutes to allow members to access the digital voting system. 15:22 Meeting suspended. 15:29 On resuming— The Deputy Presiding Officer: We will proceed with the division on amendment 6. The vote is closed. Màiri McAllan: On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I could not vote. I would have voted no. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, cabinet secretary.”
“At stage 2, we recognised the overarching aim of those amendments and we agreed to consider them further before now. I have therefore lodged amendment 178. It obliges ministers to conduct a review on “the operation and effectiveness of Part 1” of the bill and to “prepare a report on that review.” That will be informed by consultation with local authorities and representatives of landlords and tenants, and it will take place five years from the provisions of part 1 taking effect. That will ensure that the review is carried out after the first cycle of local authority assessments of rent controls and will therefore be informed by part 1 having operated. That is the only way that we can truly review the process and the operation of rent controls in practice. I ask members to support the amendment. I move amendment 178.”
“Before we move to the next group, which is group 9, I will make some further comments. All the matters to be discussed and debated are extremely important, and I understand that all members will wish to do justice to that. Equally, I hope that members will reflect on making succinct contributions while achieving those objectives. I ask that members also make their interventions brief. After section 23 The Deputy Presiding Officer: We move to group 9. Amendment 178, in the name of the cabinet secretary, in the only amendment in the group. The Cabinet Secretary for Housing (Màiri McAllan): Amendment 178 responds to amendments lodged at stage 2, which sought to create a statutory duty to publish a report every five years on the operation and effectiveness of rent controls.”
“The next item of business is stage 3 proceedings on the Housing (Scotland) Bill. In dealing with the amendments, members should have the bill as amended at stage 2—that is, Scottish Parliament bill 45A—the marshalled list and the groupings of amendments. The division bell will sound and proceedings will be suspended for around five minutes for the first division of stage 3. The period of voting for the first division will be 30 seconds. Thereafter, I will allow a voting period of one minute for the first division after a debate. Members who wish to speak in the debate on any group of amendments should press their request-to-speak buttons or enter RTS in the chat function as soon as possible after I call the group. Members should now refer to the marshalled list of amendments.”
“Before we restart proceedings on the Housing (Scotland) Bill, I advise members that, following consultation between the Minister for Parliamentary Business and the business managers, I am minded to accept a motion without notice, under rule 11.2.4 of standing orders, to move decision time to 9 pm. Motion moved, That, under rule 11.2.4, Decision Time be moved to 9.00 pm.—[Graeme Dey] Motion agreed to. Housing (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3 15:19”
“The next item of business is a statement by Natalie Don-Innes on improving provision and access to residential outdoor education for children and young people in Scotland. The minister will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interruptions or interventions. 14:50”
“They think that the environment to invest and build is potentially there, and, as I said earlier, I am desperate to get new homes built so that, in Scotland, we can get homes for people who are desperate for them.”
“That seems a reasonable way to proceed, and, together with the exemptions that we discussed earlier, it will provide the certainty for investors that we want. We have been debating this issue for a long time—going all the way back to the temporary rent controls that we put in place. That has created a lot of instability for investors, and we have seen the effect of that, not just with housing associations pulling out of the mid-market rent sector but in relation to the potential investment in other areas. Therefore, I would argue that the sooner that we pass the bill, the sooner we can get the exemptions in place and the sooner we can create a stable political and regulatory environment for investors. Having spoken to many investors, I know that they are keen to get on.”
“The crucial point about amendment 280 is that it was lodged to align with existing provision in section 9(5A) of the bill. However, given that the cabinet secretary’s amendment 64 removes that section from the bill, I do not intend to move amendment 280. Willie Rennie: Setting the formula for rent controls is about moderation, because we are seeking a balance between fairness for tenants and certainty for investors, and, as I have set out, I want investors in the sector. CPI plus 1 percentage point is a reasonable way to do it. You could argue for the use of other formulas, but the cabinet secretary has set out a reasonable case in that monthly or more regular reporting on the CPI means that we can get a more accurate figure for setting the formula.”
“19:15 Mark Griffin: Amendment 280 seeks to clarify the fact that charges for domestic services, such as water, sewerage, gas, electricity, broadband and district heating, are not premiums and should be treated separately from rent. To ensure clarity and fairness in Scotland’s rental market, it is essential that the service charges are explicitly excluded from the definition of a premium. That would provide complete transparency for rent officers, letting agents and—most important— tenants themselves, clearly separating occupancy costs from service charges. That also addresses a gap, whereby published market rents often obscure whether utilities are included, making comparisons unreliable and undermining the effectiveness of rent control.”
“On amendments 170 and 171, lodged by Ms Chapman, I am unclear whether what is being suggested is that the rent should actually go down—[Interruption.] I have seen a nod, so that is what is being suggested. I am not sure whether that is ever going to be realistic, because I am not sure that prices go down year on year. They never seem to have done that since I have been alive, but that has only been 64 years—it will be 65 years next year. I am not sure that I have ever seen prices come down. I could say a lot more, but I will leave it at that as I already have one win and, given that the cabinet secretary missed out two of my amendments, I hope that I may yet get three.”
“Nevertheless, my point in respect of those amendments, which the cabinet secretary might want to address in summing up, is that the tenancy can be ended in the first year or with six months’ notice. I am therefore suggesting that if a reduced rent has been given, there ought to be the ability to reconfigure it after six months if the tenant leaves early. I think that that would make sense. I welcome the cabinet secretary’s acceptance of my amendment 175—that is the first one that she has accepted today. There is always a bit of cheer when you get your first amendment through. I agree with some of the other amendments from the cabinet secretary.”
“As I am sure that the member will be able to work out, that would be £35—that is all that the landlord would be looking for as a contribution each calendar month, when that landlord may have just put £40,000 into doing up the house. There is some benefit to the tenant. I am not saying that the tenant needs to pay for it all—far from it—but I am saying that some contribution can be made. I agree with the cabinet secretary that CPI is the right indicator to use. It is well recognised throughout the industry—in all sectors, in fact. It took me a bit of time to look up what the other indicators that Ms Chapman suggests in her amendment 168 actually are, so I agree with the cabinet secretary on that. I am not sure that I heard the cabinet secretary speak to amendments 173 and 174; she might have skipped over them accidentally.”
“I provided evidence for those costs, which I know that he discounted, but they were based on my experience as a surveyor and as a landlord. There are huge costs, which why I wanted to see whether the bill could be amended to allow landlords to go to two percentage points where they are doing improvements. Mercedes Villalba: Why does the member feel that the cost of improving, and increasing the value of, a privately held asset should fall on tenants? Edward Mountain: Well, where does the cost lie? The cost may be £40,000 for a property. Let us say that my proposed increase of two percentage points above RPI would add 5 per cent on a rent of £700 per calendar month.”
“The reason that I suggest an increase of two percentage points is that there are huge costs—as I have just alluded to—coming down the line. The requirement to replace oil or gas boilers—if that is all that a property has—with air-source heat pumps will be a huge cost. I have argued about that with the industry, but I think that we all agree that it is probably going to be a minimum of £15,000. If we add on top of that the painting of the house and the rewiring that may be required, it is clear that there will be considerable costs. I remember— [Interruption.] Mr Harvie may shake his head, but I remember showing him, when he was Minister for Zero Carbon Buildings, Active Travel and Tenants’ Rights, the costs of the EPC upgrade that he was looking for.”
“If rents for those types of houses—which are not uncommon in the Highlands—are around £600 per calendar month, it will take a huge amount of time to pay those costs back. I accept the point that Ms Chapman makes—I see owning property as a huge privilege. However, I also see it as a huge responsibility and—as many landlords do—I take my responsibility to my tenants extremely seriously. It might amuse Ms Chapman to know that the only house that I own that has no double glazing is my own, because I cannot afford to put it in, but I have made sure that every single one of my tenants’ properties has double glazing. I think that a lot of landlords would react in that way. I turn to the amendments in this group, starting with amendment 166 in my name.”
“Taken together, this section of the bill and my amendments are crucial to making rents more affordable for people everywhere in Scotland. We cannot rely on the good will of others to bring down rents. Sometimes, we have to legislate. Edward Mountain: Some of the language that I am hearing is not representative of what, I believe, happens in the rented sector. I do not believe that it is out of control. It might be in areas that Ms Chapman knows, but it is certainly not in the areas that I represent. Many landlords are trying desperately hard to improve the standard of their housing stock; I do not think that people give landlords enough credit in respect of the amount of work that needs to be done. For example, the cost of trying to upgrade a 1950s stone house may be up to £40,000.”
“Amendment 282 would ensure that a fee could not be required for challenging a rent notice. I appreciate that there might not be any intention to do that at the moment, but a fee would be a barrier to challenging a rent increase, so we must remove the possibility of that happening in the future. The amendment is about future proofing our legislation. Amendments 72 and 73, for which I am pleased to have the Scottish Government’s support, will extend from 21 to 30 days the deadline for tenants to challenge a rent increase. My earlier amendments set a much longer deadline, and I would, in truth, have preferred that, but the increase to 30 days is an improvement, and I am grateful for the work that I have been able to do with the Scottish Government in that regard.”
“Raising rents by 1 percentage point above the cost of living is simply not acceptable, and the 2 percentage point increase proposed by Edward Mountain is even more unacceptable. We should not lock in above- inflation increases, which is what the Scottish Government and the Conservatives are trying to do. Amendments 169 and 171 would allow ministers to specify exemptions to the formula to allow lower increases, a freeze or a decrease. I have already spoken about that principle in a debate on an earlier group of amendments. However, I highlight that I have lodged amendments 169 and 171 to recognise that rents in some areas of Scotland have gone up by as much as 100 per cent in the past 15 years, so even a small increase would simply pile misery on top of that. In those cases, a smaller increase, a freeze or a cut would be essential.”
“However, in Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire, rents would have been £66 per month lower. For many renters on low incomes who are struggling with the rising cost of living, that would have represented a huge help to them. Importantly, my amendments would establish a critical principle: rents should match people’s ability to pay. If the earnings and living standards of renters are not increasing, neither should those of landlords. If landlords’ incomes rise more quickly than renters’ incomes, that is nothing more than a pure extraction of wealth from those on lower incomes by those with the privilege of owning property. That is not something that Greens have made up. Shelter England has proposed precisely the same system for England.”
“Amendment 165 and its consequential amendments would change the formula that the Scottish Government has proposed, which will cap rent increases at CPI plus 1 percentage point, up to a maximum of 6 per cent. My alternative is to cap rent increases at the lowest of CPI or earnings growth, up to the same maximum of 6 per cent. That is an important principle. I asked the Scottish Parliament information centre to model both those formulae. The Green version would have made a small but significant difference to rents in most areas, although it would have made a bigger difference in others. In Glasgow, had that formula been applied since 2019, rents would have been, on average, £19 a month lower than they would have been had the Scottish Government’s formula been in place.”
“If the bill is passed, the provisions in this part of it will introduce the first rent controls in Scotland for almost four decades. Another Maggie took them away, but I am proud to be a Maggie in a team of people who are bringing back rent controls. Their introduction could not come a moment too soon. Since 2010, rent for a two-bedroom property has increased by 61 per cent across Scotland, by 82 per cent in Glasgow and by a staggering 104 per cent in Lothian. Has the quality of properties soared to match those rent increases? No. Have people’s wages in Lothian gone up by 104 per cent? No. That is a sign of a fundamentally out-of- control private rented sector.”
“The member knows that my principal concern is that that approach would take the cost of utilities outwith the protection that it would otherwise be afforded were that still within the definition of rent. As such, I have significant concerns about amendment 280 and its potential to undermine tenant protections. I am sure that Mark Griffin would not want to pursue that. I cannot support his amendment and would ask him not to move it. I urge members to support my amendments in the group, along with Maggie Chapman’s amendments 72 and 73, and Edward Mountain’s amendment 175, and to reject the other amendments in their names and the amendment in the name of Mark Griffin. Maggie Chapman: In many ways, this is the most important part of the bill.”
“Although tenants in a rent control area can challenge a proposed rent increase on the basis that it does not comply with the cap, the reason for the rent increase ought not to be a factor. Such information would therefore not be helpful to the tenant; it would largely be irrelevant and have no bearing on the decision at the end of the day. Mark Griffin’s amendment 280 is similar to a stage 2 amendment that would have changed the definition of “rent” for the purposes of rent increases in a rent control area. We have discussed the issue previously. That would exclude from the definition of rent any amounts payable to the landlord in respect of various utilities.”
“I still consider that to be the best approach, and that keeping the margin at 1 percentage point does what I have been seeking to do throughout: it balances proportionality and affordability. I cannot support those amendments. Amendment 175, in the name of Edward Mountain, would remove the requirement that rent increase notices for private residential tenancies in rent control areas should set out the reasons for the proposed rent increase. That provision was inserted at stage 2. As we made clear at stage 2, we believe that requiring all landlords of relevant tenancies in rent control areas to provide such information to tenants when increasing the rent is an unnecessary intrusion into the landlord’s privacy, with no obvious benefit to the tenant.”
“I hope that my amendment 74 gathers support as a proportionate way of addressing much of what Maggie Chapman had been intending through her amendments. Amendment 166, in the name of Edward Mountain, alters the rent cap formula from the consumer prices index plus one percentage point to CPI plus two percentage points. We have discussed the CPI percentage a lot. The formulation of CPI plus one percentage point is in line with stakeholders in the sector have been calling for. Stakeholders, including the Scottish Property Federation and the Association for Rental Living, welcomed the clarity that we provided in our statement last October and the agreement that was reached at stage 2 in committee. We set out at stage 2 that allowing some margin over inflation would give investors assurance.”
“I cannot support the amendments, but I hope that Ms Chapman will be reassured by that rationale and by the fact that similar powers have not been used. Amendments 34 to 36 and 41 to 43 are in the name of Maggie Chapman. Several of those are substantially similar to amendments that were lodged at stage 2 and would not be required if my amendments 74 and 121 are agreed to. Although Ms Chapman’s amendments would require a rent officer to issue an order for a landlord to pay compensation to a tenant where it is determined that a proposed rent increase is above the cap, the power that amendment 74 confers offers a more flexible approach that will allow for financial penalties and compensation to be provided for in cases where that might be appropriate and proportionate, following consultation with landlords and tenants.”
“The bill includes a power for the Scottish ministers to prescribe a fee to be charged when a tenant refers a proposed rent increase to a rent officer for a determination on whether the increase would be above the cap. Those amendments, in the name of Maggie Chapman, would remove the power for the Scottish ministers to prescribe such a fee for rent verification within a rent control area. The inclusion of that power is intended to provide the Scottish ministers with the flexibility to prescribe a fee if, once the provisions are in operation, that becomes necessary to support their operation. The power is about facilitating that process. A similar power exists in the Private Housing (Tenancies) (Scotland) Act 2016 in relation to rent adjudication, although that has never been used.”
“Amendments 72 and 73, which are also in the name of Maggie Chapman, seek to extend the deadlines, from 21 to 30 days, for a tenant in a rent control area to notify a landlord that they consider a proposed rent increase to be in excess of the rent cap. 19:00 At stage 2, members lodged amendments that sought to increase the amount of time that tenants would have to make a notification in those circumstances. The timescale set out in those amendments offers the best balance between protecting tenants and ensuring that there is clarity for all parties. Therefore, I am happy to support amendments 72 and 73. I turn to amendments 281 and 282.”
“Amendment 170, which is also in Maggie Chapman’s name, would remove the provision that will prevent the rent cap from dropping below 0 per cent and remove the Scottish ministers’ power to substitute the percentage values in the rent cap. That would be replaced with a power for us to specify a lower percentage than that which is specified in the fixed formula, and to specify the circumstances in which that percentage should apply. As it would mean that the percentage that was specified could be less than 0 per cent, amendment 170 would open up the possibility of rent decreases. As we have discussed, that is not the intention of rent controls, which are about stabilising rents that are rising too quickly.”
“Màiri McAllan: I think that I have been clear on the strengths, as I see them, of CPI versus the other indicators that Maggie Chapman has proposed. One of the most important strengths is the frequency with which CPI is published and the fact that it reflects price increases up to very recently—the month before. It is well understood and it correlates with price pressures that not only tenants but landlords face. For all those reasons, I believe that it remains the appropriate measurement. It was also voted on at stage 2. For those reasons, I cannot support Maggie Chapman’s amendments 165, 167 to 169 and 171.”
“Against all of that—I am just about to take the intervention—the consumer prices index is published monthly and it reflects the price increases that have been experienced up to the previous month. It is a well-understood measure that has widespread use and it correlates with price pressures that are faced by both tenants and landlords. It is therefore a transparent, easy-to- understand formula, and I believe that we should stick with it. Maggie Chapman: I am grateful to the cabinet secretary for taking my intervention and for running through her rationale for that. She said that wage inflation is not a reliable measure of household income. Does she think that CPI is a reliable indicator of either household expenditure or household income? It is not.”
“Màiri McAllan: I want to cover the rest of my points on these amendments first, because I want to get the information on the record. When I have done that, I will take the member’s intervention. Furthermore, it is not a measure of rates of pay, as it can be affected by changes in the composition of an enterprise’s workforce, such as the proportion who work full time and the proportion who work part time. We therefore do not consider that the wage growth indicators whose use is proposed in the amendments are robust enough to provide a reliable link between wages and tenants’ income, to sufficiently reflect the costs of maintaining a household, or to provide clarity on the costs that tenants are likely to face. Measures of wage growth are also unlikely to fully reflect costs that landlords may face.”
“The ASHE percentage is defined as the difference in the median weekly earnings and the AWE percentage is defined as the difference in the average weekly earnings over the preceding 12 months. As was set out at stage 2, wage growth is not a direct measure of changes in household income as it excludes changes in hours worked and income from self-employment, social security and other assets. In addition, there are other complexities relating to those measures. For example, the data from the annual survey of hours and earnings is published only once a year, with a significant lag. Although average weekly earnings data is published monthly, the headline measure, which includes bonus payments, can be volatile. Maggie Chapman: Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?”
“I turn to members’ amendments in the group. Maggie Chapman’s amendments 165 and 167 would amend the rent cap formula that was introduced to the bill at stage 2. If amendment 165 is agreed to, the permitted rate of rent increase specified in the legislation would be the lower of the CPI percentage, the annual survey of hours and earnings percentage and the average weekly earnings percentage. That modified formula would replace the one that the committee agreed to. Amendment 167 provides that the Scottish ministers may set an alternative lower percentage “in specified circumstances” under new powers conferred by amendment 171, and amendment 169 would provide a definition of those “specified circumstances”. Ms Chapman’s amendment 168 provides definitions of the terms that are used in amendment 165.”