Ross Greer
Scottish Green Party · Scotland
“In the short term, will the Government introduce measures such as the Scottish Greens’ proposed Amazon tax—a higher rate of NDR for large online retailers—to help even the playing field for small businesses and local high streets?”
“I welcome the fact that vape shops will now be paying full rates. However, that shows how poorly designed the small business bonus scheme was in the first place. The Government spends more than £200 million a year on untargeted reliefs, despite its own review finding no economic benefit to the scheme.”
“Scotland faces a wave of applications for hyperscale data centres. If all the applications that are currently in the pipeline were approved, they would consume up to 6,000MW of power, which is more than one and a half times our entire national power use at peak time and is obviously completely impossible.”
“The Government’s policy is to support what it refers to as “green” data centres, but that position was decided before ChatGPT existed, before Elon Musk launched Grok and before any of those hyperscale proposals came forward. So, what is the Scottish Government’s definition of a “green” data centre?”
“I am glad that the Labour Party has secured a debate on restoring public trust in Scottish politics, because, quite clearly, the public have very little trust in our political institutions. However, that did not begin and does not end with Peter Murrell’s crimes against the SNP.”
“If we want to talk about the damage that has been done to our politics in a UK context, we could mention Labour Together, an institution with strong links to the Prime Minister that was caught spying on journalists and did not declare substantial amounts of money that it had received in donations.”
The complete record
Every one of 553 lines we hold for Ross Greer, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 12.
“For Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Ind) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Lab) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Lennon, Monica (Central Scotland) (Lab) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Reform) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Against Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) [Proxy vote cast by Ross Greer] Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Fulton MacGregor] Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) [Proxy vote cast by Willie Rennie] Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 40, Against 66, Abstentions 0.”
“Amendment 220 disagreed to. Amendment 221 moved—[Edward Mountain]. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 221 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division.”
“For Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Lab) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Lennon, Monica (Central Scotland) (Lab) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) [Proxy vote cast by Ross Greer] McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Against Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Ind) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Reform) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Fulton MacGregor] Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) [Proxy vote cast by Willie Rennie] Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 44, Against 61, Abstentions 0.”
“Amendment 45 disagreed to. Amendment 220 moved—[Maggie Chapman]. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 220 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division.”
“For Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) [Proxy vote cast by Ross Greer] Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Against Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Ind) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Lab) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Lennon, Monica (Central Scotland) (Lab) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Reform) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Fulton MacGregor] Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) [Proxy vote cast by Willie Rennie] Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 7, Against 98, Abstentions 0.”
“The idea that we can keep going over the same ground, repeating the same calls for evidence and getting the same answers time and again is really frustrating, especially for young people and students who have been looking for a solution to the problem for years. This is not a new problem— the Government identified it and had a report with very clear recommendations three years ago. I find it deeply frustrating that we are back in the same place looking for more evidence on something that we know very well is necessary. With that, I will press amendment 45. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 45 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division.”
“Mr Griffin knows that I do not support the changes to remove utility payments from the definition of rent payable, not least because that would take those payments outwith protections that might otherwise accrue to rent, which could leave tenants open to abuse of that provision. I will leave it there. 19:15 The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Maggie Chapman to wind up and to press or withdraw amendment 45. Maggie Chapman: I will restrict my remarks to the issue of guarantors. Yesterday, I proposed a guarantor scheme for international students— students who will not have the family support networks or other people who are usually relied on to be guarantors. This evening, Ross Greer has called for a guarantor scheme for estranged students, or for the power to enable the Government to set one up, should it so wish.”
“Edward Mountain’s amendments 223 to 227 seek to change the purposes for which unclaimed tenancy deposits could be used. A similar amendment was lodged at stage 2. We made clear then what I will make clear today: unclaimed tenancy deposits are sums that have been paid by private tenants and we believe that they should be used to benefit private tenants and those seeking to access the private rented sector. I cannot support those amendments. Amendments 391 and 392 have cropped up a few times throughout stage 3. For the reasons that I have set out before, I cannot support them.”
“That amendment does not specify public bodies and does not say that the Government must set up that scheme; it simply gives it the power to do so if, for example, the mapping exercise concludes that that is necessary. Why would the Government not want the option of doing that at a later point, without the compulsion to do so? Màiri McAllan: The work is under way. I do not need primary legislation for that to be the case. However, I will draw out my other point, which is very important and which we must not lose sight of, about how we justify pursuing a scheme for estranged young people to the exclusion of others. The work that I and the Government have been undertaking is much broader than that, and the results of it could, in turn, be much broader.”
“Early findings show inconsistent support and a lack of clear pathways. My intention is that, once that work is complete, there will be a more consistent and accessible approach, potentially through national guidance or a framework. I commit today to progressing that work to improve access to rented accommodation for estranged young people, as well as others who may require support. Ross Greer: I am grateful to the cabinet secretary for taking my intervention. My frustration with that work is that it has already been done— the Government published findings in 2022. I disagree with her argument that she is not convinced about public bodies acting as guarantors, but I accept that it is the Government’s position. However, that is an argument against amendment 291; I am still unclear as to why the Government opposes amendment 292.”
“I am not convinced that conferring functions on a public body to act as a guarantor is the best way to support estranged young people, particularly in view of the additional costs and time that it would take to set up such a new scheme. Consideration would also have to be given to how to describe estranged young people in an appropriate way. Perhaps most importantly, it has not been clear to me from the discussion of these matters why it would be readily justifiable to pursue provision for one group—that is, estranged young people—to the exclusion of all others who may need support with guarantees. I know that Mr Greer has his doubts about it, but a mapping exercise is under way to identify gaps and barriers in guarantor provision across the board, and it is important that we do that work.”
“It would not be right to restrict future changes if that is the right course of action. That will be borne out in our discussions with tenants and landlords. It is also worth noting that restricting the rents that can be made available can have unintended consequences whereby landlords look for other means to have security over their contract with the prospective tenant. I will not speak to amendment 290, as Meghan Gallacher has confirmed that she will not move it. Ross Greer’s amendments 291, 292 and 379 seek to establish a rent guarantor scheme for estranged young people through regulations. I understand the concerns behind those amendments; I have met Mr Greer and discussed them with him. I am very sympathetic to the outcomes that are being sought, but I do not believe that any of the options that he has put before us are appropriate.”
“Màiri McAllan: Amendment 45, in the name of Maggie Chapman, would require existing regulation-making powers to be used to, first, specify the maximum amount of deposit and, secondly, impose a restriction so that the amount must be less than the current maximum of two months’ rent. I listened carefully to Maggie Chapman and I understand her intent. However, I cannot support her amendment. It would restrict ministers’ ability to introduce draft regulations for the Parliament’s approval that allow for appropriate tenancy deposits following consultation with landlords and tenants. In implementing the new right of tenants to seek consent to keep a pet, we have committed to consulting on conditions for approval, including on the potential for a supplementary pet deposit.”
“That would support accuracy in the open market, protect tenants from unfair practices and build trust in the system. I understand that the Government’s position is that it is already the case that the definition of rent premium does not apply to the charges for those essential services. I would be grateful if the cabinet secretary could confirm on the record whether that is in fact the case and if the Government could, if it feels that it would be appropriate, issue guidance to give clarity to the sector. If it is the case, I do not plan to move amendments 391 and 392.”
“Too often, published market rents obscure whether utilities are included, making it impossible for tenants to know whether they are being charged fairly or to make meaningful comparisons between properties. That lack of transparency can undermine trust in the sector and can leave tenants vulnerable to hidden costs. By clearly separating occupancy costs from service charges, the amendments would provide complete transparency to everyone involved. That would empower tenants to understand exactly what they are paying for, support rent officers in their regulatory role and ensure that letting agents operate on a level playing field. Ultimately, clarifying in the bill that rent means rent and is not bundled with service costs would help to create a more open, accountable and fair rental market.”
“I am sure that the Parliament will support my amendments, which would ensure that money goes into social housing, where it should be spent. Mark Griffin: Amendments 391 and 392 are about delivering clarity, fairness and transparency for tenants across Scotland’s rental sector. At present, there is a lack of consistency in how rent and service charges are defined and reported, which can leave tenants confused about what they are paying for and make it difficult to compare properties or challenge unfair charges. The amendments would make it explicit that charges for domestic services such as water, sewerage, gas, electricity, broadband and district heating are not to be treated as premiums and must be kept separate from rent. That is not purely a technical change; it has real-world consequences for tenants, letting agents and rent officers.”
“If the amendment had been shifted round to suggest that the deposit should be a percentage at higher rents rather than catching all the lower rents, that would have made sense. Ross Greer’s amendments are interesting—I had not looked at the issue from the point of view that he set out. I will be interested to hear what the cabinet secretary says in response. I strongly agree with Mr Griffin’s amendments. Other things are sometimes included in the rent figure, such as private water supplies and private sewerage, that are not the rent for the house. Those charges are probably equivalent to what Scottish Water would charge, which we are told is so reasonable, for the disposal of waste. I am interested to hear what the cabinet secretary says.”
“We should allow the people who are renting in that sector to benefit from that £6 million pot, and my amendments 223, 224, 225 and 227 are all technical amendments to allow that to happen. I believe that they should get the Parliament’s support, and I will be surprised if they do not. I listened to Maggie Chapman’s point on amendment 45. Sadly, she bases all her decisions on rents in urban areas. Rents in rural areas are much lower and could be as low as £700 a month. Two months’ rent would be £1,400, which, in my mind and experience, would allow for just one room in one house to be repainted and recarpeted if there is any damage at the end of a tenancy. That seems entirely reasonable.”
“Edward Mountain: The point of these amendments is to ensure that unclaimed deposits are used properly and are not allowed to sit and fritter away. I will give just a little bit of information. Members might be surprised to learn that, in November 2024, 23,123 unclaimed deposits were sitting with SafeDeposits Scotland, with a total value of £6,310,182. SafeDeposits Scotland is getting the interest, which I assume means that it is getting about £300,000 a year. That is the sort of money that is sitting there and that the Government, through some of its amendments, wants to use to inform tenants in private tenancies about the obligations and the bill. I do not want to do that. The money should be used to increase and improve the standard of social housing.”
“Guarantor requirements act as a massive barrier to that, and they often allow abusers to maintain a position of power over young people into their adult life. This small step would have a transformational impact for a vulnerable group in our society, who are at far higher risk of homelessness than most of us. If members agree on the principle of that but still have specific concerns that we do not have time to discuss today, and which mean that they cannot support amendment 291, I urge them to support amendment 292, to give ministers the clear power to set up such a scheme in the future, once the Government’s concerns have been addressed. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Edward Mountain to speak to amendment 223 and other amendments in the group.”
“In Glasgow’s case, that is due to the campaigning work of its former student, now the councillor for the area, Blair Anderson. However, other institutions have no arrangements in place at all. The Government has already looked at the issue in this session and been told to act. This was a Bute house agreement commitment and, to be completely honest, the reasons that were given to me by some in the Government for not taking it forward over the past few years were tenuous, verging on nonsensical. The financial costs are completely negligible, for a start. It is a sad reality that, for some young people, moving away from home for the first time for university or another reason is the first opportunity to escape an abusive family or home situation.”
“That research said: “the implementation of a national guarantorship system was recommended to assist estranged students access accommodation more easily.” We know that it can be difficult for many young people and students to get landlords and letting agents to take them on, and they often require guarantors as a form of security. It is obvious that most people in that situation turn to older family members to step in as those guarantors. Those who do not have family that they can turn to due to estrangement are at a significant disadvantage, making it even harder for them to access housing and compounding the huge challenges that they already face. We know that the landscape is uneven right now. Some universities, such as the University of Glasgow, have generous and comprehensive support packages, including guarantorship schemes.”
“Amendment 292 replaces “must” with “may”, giving ministers the power to do so, but not compelling them to use it. The Government has recognised the significant barriers that estranged young people face in accessing housing, so it is disappointing that it is not backing those options. Instead, the cabinet secretary announced yesterday that we are getting another mapping exercise. I have to say that I felt utterly deflated hearing that. How many times does the Government need to ask the same question, gather the same evidence and form the same working groups? The Government commissioned research into the barriers that affect estranged young people in further and higher education, which was published three years ago, under the title, “Research to understand the experiences of estranged students in further and higher education in Scotland”.”
“I will try to reasonably curtail myself, in the interests of time. Amendments 291 and 292 are alternative options to achieve the same aim: a guarantor scheme for people who are estranged from their families. Amendment 379 is a consequential amendment to either or both of those. Amendment 291 would require ministers to create a scheme whereby a public body—such as a council or a university—is to act as a guarantor for a young person who is estranged from their family, supporting them with access to private tenancies. Amendment 292 is an attempt at compromise. It was drafted to reflect points that were raised by the Government at stage 2, particularly around the need for consultation and its hesitance around specific bodies acting as guarantors. Amendment 291 says that ministers “must” create a guarantor scheme for estranged young people.”
“As I outlined in my statement, I can see the benefits of residential outdoor education, which I spoke about at the centres that I visited. We know that it has many positive aspects, including the fact that it leads to huge improvements in pupils’ attendance, their behaviour and their relationships with teachers. On the other hand, the non- residential outdoor education that takes place at schools and nurseries daily also has huge benefits, which we need to continue to promote as the bill progresses. I am more than happy to discuss the specific points that Mr Greer raised, in the same vein as I have committed to speaking to members across the chamber.”
“The minister referenced the importance of outdoor learning being reflected in the learning for sustainability action plan, which I was proud to work on with the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills. I am glad to see it being referenced. The passage of Liz Smith’s bill would result in far more children and young people gaining the kind of knowledge and skills that come from outdoor residential education. That knowledge and those skills should be formally recognised, in line with what the action plan says about developing new qualifications. Does the minister agree with that? Will the Scottish Government look again at Professor Louise Hayward’s proposals on that in her 2023 report? Natalie Don-Innes: I would be more than happy to discuss that with Mr Greer ahead of stage 2.”
“I therefore support amendments 105 and 116. Amendments 123, 124 and 137, in my name, seek to reverse amendments that were agreed to at stage 2 in relation to rent control and student tenancies. I believe that it was a significant error to have agreed to those amendments in the first place. We have always been clear that student tenancies are not part of the mainstream private rented sector and should not be included in rent controls in the bill. The fact that the stage 2 amendments that were agreed to have caused significant confusion and concern in the sector has been reflected clearly in our engagement with student housing providers since stage 2.”
“Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention? Màiri McAllan: I will finish this point, and then I will be glad to do so. It is not appropriate to specify that certain groups of students can end a tenancy whereas others who may be in similar circumstances are unable to do so. I therefore cannot support Ross Greer’s amendments 372 and 388. However, I will certainly take his intervention. Ross Greer: For the sake of time, I clarify to the cabinet secretary that, given that we all agree on the outcome, I am happy not to move my amendments 372 and 388 and for the Green group to support amendment 105. Màiri McAllan: I, too, believe that amendment 105 and its consequential amendment 116, in the name of Pam Duncan-Glancy, present the best, most balanced approach to the issue of ending student tenancies, which includes a duty to consult.”
“This Parliament passed the International Criminal Court (Scotland) Act 2001, making genocide and war crimes offences in Scots law, regardless of where they are committed. I ask the First Minister to confirm that that law will be applied in full and that anyone in Scotland who has served in Israel’s occupation forces will be investigated and, if necessary, prosecuted for the part that they have played in the crime of genocide and occupation.”
“The President of Israel, whose statements have been cited by the International Court of Justice as plausible evidence of Israel’s genocidal intent, was welcomed to the United Kingdom with open arms by Keir Starmer this week. He is the same President who signed his name on bombs that were dropped on homes, hospitals and schools. He is the same President who said that there are no innocent civilians in Gaza. Keir Starmer is treating peaceful protesters like terrorists, while rolling out the red carpet for the head of a genocidal apartheid regime. This is not just about visits from Israel’s heads of state. British citizens and residents have travelled to serve in Israel’s occupation forces, making them complicit in war crimes.”
“The Scottish Greens have a plan to end that scandal and bring our debt collection rules into line with the rest of the United Kingdom by changing the Housing (Scotland) Bill. Will the First Minister support our plan to end that cruel regime and break the cycle of poverty that so many families are stuck in?”
“Scots are trapped in almost £2 billion of council tax debt. They are locked into poverty and are living in fear of bailiffs at their door. Some of the families that are trapped in that situation spoke to Aberlour. They said: “I felt like I was stuck in a hole, and I was getting deeper into it, and I wasn’t going to be able to get out of it.” They also said: “You worry about being seen as a bad parent. Or you worry and are upset that your kids are missing out on things or treats and stuff like that.” Thousands of families across Scotland are trapped in that situation. The rules for council tax debt in Scotland are four times as harsh as they are in England, which is trapping families, in some cases, with unpayable debts for decades.”
“Will he ask every business in Scotland to join the global boycott against apartheid Israel? The First Minister: The comments that I have made in my statement set out the range of interventions that the Scottish Government can take—the very significant range of interventions that we can take within our power. Part of that involves the approach that we are taking on international trade. We are making it clear that the Scottish Government will not support the development, encouragement or nurturing of international trade. That is the correct approach for us to take so that we are focused entirely on using our influence and resources to ensure that the conflict is brought to an end.”
“Israel is an apartheid state. It has occupied Palestinian land and brutalised the Palestinian people for almost 80 years. Over the past two years, it has systematically slaughtered the people of Gaza—a genocide. I am glad that the Scottish Government has finally accepted the Scottish Greens’ proposal to end all public funding for Israel’s arms dealers. That sets an example for nations around Europe and the world to follow. However, we can and must go further. When Putin brutally and illegally invaded Ukraine, the Scottish Government rightly and immediately called on every Scottish business to sever all ties and cease all trade with Russia. Palestinian lives are worth no less than Ukrainian or Scottish lives. Will the First Minister take the opportunity this afternoon to make that same call?”
“I move amendment S6M-18671.3, to insert at end: “; is concerned that Scottish Government action to tackle the climate emergency has been scaled back, that targets for reducing child poverty have been missed and that the wealthiest 2% of households in Scotland hold more wealth than the bottom 50%; recognises that tackling the climate emergency, eradicating child poverty and ensuring high- quality and sustainable public services will require further redistribution of wealth, and calls, therefore, on the Scottish Government to make bold use of its existing tax-raising powers, including the creation of new revenue-raising mechanisms for local government.” The Deputy Presiding Officer: I remind members who wish to speak in the debate to check that they have, in fact, pressed their request-to-speak button. 15:49”
“However, there is a majority to deliver council tax reform if the Government is brave enough to lead that majority. It is absolutely true that Scotland has done more than any other UK nation to tackle child poverty and the climate emergency, but it is also true that we are still not doing enough on either of those issues. Indeed, on climate action, the Government’s ambitions are being scaled back. Scotland needs MSPs and Government ministers who are bold and brave enough to take on those who have rigged the system: the super rich and the big polluters. Only by doing that can we defeat the forces of hate who are exploiting our communities and build the fairer, greener society that the vast majority of people in Scotland want to see.”
“That is why the Green amendment “calls ... on the Scottish Government to make bold use of its existing tax-raising powers, including the creation of new revenue-raising mechanisms for local government.” That means fixing our broken council tax system. It cannot be right that the poorest households are paying the highest share of their income in council tax or that we have a tax system in which more than half of all households in this country are paying the wrong rate—a system that is based on property values from before I was even born. I say to the Scottish Government, in response to its line that we can achieve council tax reform only through consensus, that that is not going to work. There is no prospect of consensus, particularly as we look ahead to the next session of Parliament.”
“We have doubled the additional dwelling supplement, taking on the buy-to-let landlords—in particular, short-term let landlords—and freeing up thousands of homes for young families to live in, while raising £0.25 billion to invest in public services. We have delivered more powers for local government, including the visitor levy, which will raise millions of pounds to deliver on the issues that people really care about, such as the quality of their roads and pavements and their libraries and schools. We need to recognise that it is no wonder that people are angry when they see a hugely wealthy country—Scotland is one of the wealthiest countries in the history of the world—yet they still cannot afford to take their children on a holiday or even buy new school uniforms and they cannot afford their rent.”
“People are sick of politicians with big promises but little follow-through and absolutely no plan to pay for what they have committed to. The Greens have a plan, because we are brave enough to be honest with the electorate that a better society needs to be paid for and that the wealthiest people can afford to pay, and should be paying, far more. Despite the doomsday predictions over most of the past decade, changes in our tax policy that the Greens have delivered have worked, and they are popular. Our income tax changes mean that, this year alone, there is £1.7 billion more to deliver for public services such as our schools, hospitals and public transport.”
“I am proud that we have done that through co-operation with colleagues in the SNP, but there is so much more to do. That is why the Green amendment focuses on our public finances and tax. It is outrageous that— as the Scottish Government confirmed last week— the richest 2 per cent of households in this country have more wealth than the bottom 50 per cent. This morning, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government agreed with me that that is not good enough, but the Scottish Government does not appear to have a plan to go any further on wealth redistribution. I am proud of what we have already done together, but it is clear that more is needed. We cannot lift more children out of poverty, cut emissions or hire more hospital staff without the money to pay for it.”
“This country is not working for ordinary people because it was not designed to, and I want to change that. I am proud of the Greens’ track record on changing the system. We have taken every opportunity to rebalance the scales in favour of our planet and ordinary people. We are delivering rent controls, taking power from the haves and giving it to the have-nots. We stand up for Scotland’s natural heritage against corporate greed, as in our campaign to protect Loch Lomond from Flamingo Land. We have fundamentally transferred wealth in this society, taxing those who can afford it in order to extend the Scottish child payment and free school meals, to deliver free bus travel for young people and to buck the UK-wide trend of rising child poverty.”
“That is what we need to change. To change it, we need to take on those who have rigged the system. We need to take on the super-rich, the big polluters and the greedy landlords. My message to the people of Scotland is that the Scottish Green Party is on your side. We are fighting your corner. There are too many politicians—including in the chamber now—who are whipping up hatred in our communities and who are lying to the public about who the enemy is. Trans people and asylum seekers are not the problem. They did not sell off the community centres, privatise the buses or increase rents. We will take on the bigots and the conmen who are directing that anger at the most vulnerable in our society and we will direct it at those who are often bankrolled by the people who are really at fault— the people who have rigged the system.”
“We have a lot to be proud of. The Scottish Greens certainly have a lot to be proud of in this session of Parliament so far: the removal of peak rail fares, which will save commuters hundreds—and, in some cases, thousands—of pounds; the fact that this is the only part of the UK where child poverty is going down; and the fact that, just two weeks ago, when the schools started again, there were 6,000 more children eligible for free school meals as a result of agreements made in this Parliament. However, we cannot deny the fact that people are angry. Communities are being pulled apart and families feel unhappy, and it is because their lives are not getting better. This country is not working for them. Whether it is the cost of living or the climate crisis, it is not because the systems are broken—it is because they are rigged.”
“Published in Edinburgh by the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, the Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh, EH99 1SP All documents are available on the Scottish Parliament website at: www.parliament.scot Information on non-endorsed print suppliers is available here: www.parliament.scot/documents For information on the Scottish Parliament contact Public Information on: Telephone: 0131 348 5000 Textphone: 0800 092 7100 Email: sp.info@parliament.scot”
“Nonetheless, we have given powers to local authorities and there are a number of examples of where things are beginning to turn around. I give a guarantee that, as long as I am the minister for buses, I will do everything in my power to make bus services work for the people who are trying to use them. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, minister. That concludes the debate at the end of a long week. I congratulate members on making it to the bitter end, and I wish members and staff a restful summer. Meeting closed at 17:50. This is the final edition of the Official Report for this meeting. It is part of the Scottish Parliament Official Report archive and has been sent for legal deposit.”
“I met members of that group recently, and I encourage their commitment to engaging with local communities, to go back to the point that Clare Haughey made. Further, engagement with the bus services is absolutely essential. I understand that they are private companies, but they serve the public. In addition, as I have said, I have met SPT on a couple of occasions. I am going to ditch my speech altogether, Presiding Officer. I share the frustration of the members who are in the chamber that so much public funding is put into bus services and yet we do not have a say over when services are cut or what the routes will be, nor control over any of the other things that we would genuinely hope that a public transport provider would have. It is a deregulated market.”
“We are investing more than £2.6 billion in 2025- 26 to support public transport and make the transport system affordable and more available and accessible for all. We are increasing our funding for bus services and concessionary travel from £430 million in 2024-25 to £465 million. Over the coming year, we will provide almost £50 million to support bus services, so that operators can continue to provide access to affordable transport. The LTAs have a duty under the Transport Act 1985 to identify where there are social needs for particular services, which they can subsidise at their discretion. To help them with that, we provide funding through the general revenue grant. In 2023-24, the LTAs spent £56 million subsidising essential services. Several members have already congratulated Get Glasgow Moving, and I add my congratulations.”
“It is very well aware of the robustness that it will have to put into its process, which would give me confidence to say that it will get its franchise through, because it knows that every i has to be dotted and every t has to be crossed as a result of having the panel there in the first place. If nobody else wants to intervene, I will continue. I have absolutely no idea where I am in my speech now. What I will say is that I very much welcome Get Glasgow Moving to the public gallery. The work that it has done has been phenomenal. I have met members of the group at least once— one unofficially and one officially. I will try to go back to my speech. We want more people travelling by public transport for work, study and leisure, and I am encouraged that authorities across Scotland are already exploring that.”
“Paul Sweeney: Does the minister recognise the concerns raised by SPT that the panel could demand the rejection of the proposal or require changes that would cause significant delay, with the latter triggering a renewed cycle of the franchising framework and assessment process? Can he at least give some reassurance about how that would be managed? Jim Fairlie: I cannot give the reassurance that the panel will accept the franchise unless the people who are pulling the franchise together do it in such a robust way that it will not be rejected. There is something here about the psyche of SPT. I have met representatives of SPT on a couple of occasions and we have had this conversation.”
“In the franchising process, the final robust step is that the panel makes sure that everything has been done. On the processes that have been carried out in England that have not worked or that were refused—the ones that I assume Mr Harvie is talking about—that was on the basis of a financial issue only. The processes did not look at the entirety of the service. The process that members agreed to in this chamber in 2019 put that robustness in place, and it is now in the primary legislation. That is why a panel is required and why we are where we are. Paul Sweeney: Will Jim Fairlie give way on that point? Jim Fairlie: Well, I am not going to get through all the other things that I was going to talk about, but I will take Paul Sweeney’s intervention. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Very briefly, please, Mr Sweeney.”