Legacy Report of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee, Session 6

The Committee believes that it will be important for future committees to maintain an interest in the operation of the Fiscal Framework, particularly how COSLA and the Scottish Government are working together to review that and any amendments which will be made as a result.

The Committee welcomes progress made on ring fencing of funding for local authorities from the Scottish Government and suggests future committees should maintain an interest in this to ensure progress continues.

The Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee suggests our successor should consider the monitoring and accountability framework early in the next Session and, as with the Fiscal Framework, maintain an interest in its ongoing operation.

A successor committee may wish to be aware of work taking place between COSLA and the Scottish Government on a general power of competence and the potential for legislation in this area in Session 7.

The Committee highlights the work it has done in tracking progress of the Local Governance Review since the start of the session. We believe this work has not progressed at pace despite its importance and suggest a successor committee may wish to continue to seek an update from the Scottish Government and COSLA early in the next Session. The Scottish Government and COSLA have previously said the implementation phase will be in the next Parliament, including any legislative elements required.

The Committee suggests that its successor may wish to consider how the discretionary power of visitor levy schemes by local authorities has been implemented once the first few schemes are in operation.

A future committee may also wish to be aware of the potential for primary legislation on a cruise ship levy and a point of entry levy.

A successor committee may wish to consider the actions arising from the Scottish Government's reviews of Part 3 on participation requests and Part 5 on asset transfers of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015.

We believe it would be helpful to maintain the focus we have had this Session on allotments due to their significance in the community empowerment agenda. More generally we recommend a successor committee should maintain an interest in the duties of local authorities under the Good Food Nation (Scotland) Act 2024. Further subordinate legislation on the specified functions is anticipated and the provisions in the Act which place duties on local authorities to report are yet to be commenced. We think implementation of this should be monitored and a successor committee may wish to consider local authority plans when complete.

More generally, we have noticed a theme running through our work this Session of local authority reporting requirements, of which there are many. These tend to arise under different pieces of legislation without consideration of how any one requirement links to another. We believe that an audit of local authority statutory reporting requirements would be an interesting area to explore.

The Committee believes a successor committee charged with considering the work of local government should consider local authorities' roles and responsibilities under the community wealth building legislation passed by the Scottish Parliament in February 2026. In particular we highlight the role of procurement in supporting local economies.

We believe particular attention should be paid to how local authorities propose to deal with vacant and derelict land and buildings, including bringing them back into use.

The Bill as passed requires action from local authorities and, as we have recommended elsewhere in this report, we think a future committee could make a valuable contribution were it to consider the number of reporting duties borne by local authorities and whether there are any areas of overlap.

The Committee hoped to have a positive impact in the work it undertook on understanding barriers to participation in local politics. Our tracker reports have allowed us to revisit the issue each year, but we did not consider this in as much depth each year as we would have liked due to scheduling of other work. A successor committee may wish to maintain an interest in understanding barriers to participation in local politics and build on the work undertaken to engage with parties and local authorities.

A successor committee may wish to pursue the work understood to be carried out by COSLA on the wider recommendations of the Scottish Local Authorities Remuneration Committee (SLARC) relating to expenses and the introduction of a severance payment.

A successor committee may also be interested to see what impact the increase in councillor pay has had.

It is with great disappointment that we highlight the events which have transpired this Session in relation to reviews of local authority electoral boundaries. There has been a lack of progress on reviews in both Highland and Argyll and Bute Council areas, which Boundaries Scotland has acknowledged is detrimental for citizens in those areas.

We do not agree with the Scottish Government's and Boundaries Scotland's view on the need for change of process and are extremely disappointed that the outcome of the Review of the Process for Determining Electoral Boundaries, which appeared pre-disposed to this. We do not agree with the previous Minister for Parliamentary Business's view that there is "consensus" on moving to a system of automaticity. We do not believe that the proposed role for the Electoral Commission in reviewing the proposals of Boundaries Scotland is sufficient.

We acknowledge the Scottish Government's position that changing the system of adoption of recommendations by Boundaries Scotland will require primary legislation. We urge a successor committee considering any such legislation in the next session to take our submission to the Review into account and protect the role of the Parliament in determining local authority electoral boundaries and arrangements.

We also believe community cohesion is an important factor in considering local authority electoral boundaries and arrangements. Communities must be consulted thoroughly on specific recommendations of the Review in any consideration by the Parliament of potential changes to the system.

Future committees with an interest in non-domestic rates from a business and local government perspective may wish to keep this under review.

A successor committee may wish to maintain an interest in how local authorities are being asked to deliver social care services and the resources which are being made available to support this.

As we have noted elsewhere in this report, responding to immediate needs like social care will always be a priority over investing in public service reform measures. However, barriers to innovation will perpetuate if upfront investment to improve delivery of all services, including social care, is not made.

We recognise the work that has already been undertaken on council tax reform and acknowledge there are different views on how this should be progressed. There are several outstanding issues and questions arising from our inquiry on council tax reform which the Committee believes could be pursued as part of future consideration of this issue:
The Scottish Government committed to a debate in the Scottish Parliament in early 2026 informed by the research by the Institute of Fiscal Studies, which has not taken place. A future committee may wish to consider this research if undertaking any work on council tax reform.
The Committee had recommended the Scottish Government should provide a specification to the Scottish Assessors Association to allow it to estimate the cost of overall revaluation. A cost has been estimated in the Budget for 2026-27 for the creation of two additional bands and we were told by the Scottish Government that "The assessors are confident in their assessment of the costs of undertaking the exercise over the two-year period and in the appeals process that they have provided to us...". i Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee, Official Report , 27 January 2026 , Col 42 It is not clear to the Committee whether this has been part of a comprehensive estimate of the costs of recalibrating council tax bands. We have not been provided with the specification for overall revaluation as requested and a future committee may wish to pursue the request for clarity on what assessments have been made of the cost of revaluation.
The public consultation closed on 30 January. We were told a summary of responses would be available in late March or early April. i Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee, Official Report , 27 January 2026 , Col 43 In addition, a wider engagement programme took place in 2025 and the results of this are anticipated to be included in the consultation analysis. The timing of this means the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee has not had the opportunity to consider the results of this exercise.

As the National Performance Framework's National Outcomes are to be reviewed every 5 years, a review in Session 7 is likely and our successor committee with responsibility for housing may wish to be aware of our comments on the creation of the new housing indicator. We suggest it would be valuable to consider how the new outcome has contributed to progress across housing policy.

Given the housing emergency remains ongoing, the Committee strongly recommends that its successor committee continues to monitor what progress is being made by the Scottish Government and local authorities to ease the pressures on housing availability and affordability throughout Session 7. In particular it could seek regular updates from the Scottish Government on what progress is being made in delivering its Housing Emergency Action Plan, and it may wish to engage with those local authorities which have declared a housing emergency to determine what local progress has been made and where further support from the Scottish Government would be beneficial.

As part of this work the successor committee could also continue scrutiny of the Affordable Housing Supply Programme targets and budget.

The Committee recommends that its successor committee monitors the position of housing cooperatives within Scotland’s housing sector, in particular what actions the Scottish Housing Regulator and the Scottish Government take to ensure that the sector is able to grow.

We therefore bring to our successor Committee's attention the importance of Housing to 2040 and recommend that it asks the Scottish Government for clarification on what progress is being made in achieving its Vision, and reinforces the call for a clear implementation plan for its delivery.

The Committee welcomed the appointment of a cabinet secretary with specific responsibility for housing in 2025. We hope that delivery of the Housing 2040 strategy and the Housing Emergency Action Plan will continue to be supported by a cabinet secretary with specific responsibility for their success.

The Committee recommends that its successor committee continues to monitor the housing challenges in rural and islands communities and the effectiveness of the Scottish Government's response.

Nearly nine years on since the tragedy at Grenfell, it appears that very few of the buildings in Scotland identified as at risk have since been remediated. The Committee therefore strongly recommends that progress in delivering the Scottish Government's cladding remediation programme is closely monitored during Session 7 and that a successor committee requests and considers the quarterly updates which this Committee has initiated.

The Committee recommends the following actions to our successor committee during Session 7:
Monitoring the impact that 'Awaab's Law' has on reducing incidences of damp and mould in rental properties.
Monitoring the dataset which will become available from the Scottish Housing Regulator about damp and mould in social housing.
Consider taking specific evidence on the condition of social and private rented homes available for rent or allocation, including where they are exhibiting damp and mould.

The Committee recommends that during Session 7 this issue continues to be monitored by its successor committee, in particular the ongoing impact on tenants and homeowners and the response from local authorities.

The Committee notes that, depending on the outcome of the election, legislation could be anticipated in Session 7 and highlights the draft Buildings (Heating and Energy Performance) and Heat Networks (Scotland) Bill to a successor committee. We have not had the opportunity to consider this in detail.

The Scottish Government has indicated it will publish the final Climate Change Plan in this Session and a new Heat in Buildings Strategy and Delivery Plan is also anticipated later in 2026 as a result of this. We suggest consideration of these should be in the work programme of a successor committee with responsibility for examining heat in buildings policy and could build on the work we have conducted and the conclusions reached in our report on the draft Climate Change Plan.

In addition, our successor Committee should seek updates from the Scottish Government about the progress it is making with the delayed regulations introducing minimum energy efficiency standards for private rental properties. A future committee may also wish to assess progress on the same standard for social rented housing.

Rent control areas may be created during the course of Session 7. The Committee recommends that the impact and success of the rent control legislation are monitored by our successor committee.

During Session 7, our successor committee may wish to monitor the impact of the licensing of short-term lets on improving housing supply and affordability, particularly in the context of the ongoing housing emergency.

Our successor Committee in Session 7 may wish to consider further this difference between Scottish and European short-term let licensing schemes.

Our successor committee may wish to consider issues raised with this Committee on enforcing the rights of tenants and landlords during work on housing issues.

The Committee has remained committed to tracking the progress of NPF4 and the impact this is having on planning issues. We recommend our successor Committee continue to monitor the implementation of NPF4.

We believe future consideration of NPF4 and other planning policy should incorporate gender sensitive planning.

Local place plans are due to be reviewed in summer 2026 and the Scottish Government must lay a report on this in the Scottish Parliament.

We recommend our successor committee could use the information we have gathered on the prevalence of the creation of local place plans around Scotland as a foundation for further consideration of these. We recommend that a successor committee engage with the Scottish Government in the pursuit of more robust national data on the development of local place plans, and in particular where these are being created and the resources available in those areas. We believe the potential power inherent in local place plans should be available to all communities equally.

We also recommend our successor committee consider the outcome of the Scottish Government's review of local place plans and in particular whether these are actually contributing to or having an impact on local development plans. Otherwise, they are in danger of being a wishlist.

The Committee suggests that a successor committee could add value by holding an inquiry into vacant and derelict land and buildings, and how town centres might be revitalised. It could also examine the role of local authorities in this.

We believe this topic is an example of where a lived-experience and expert panel could support the Committee's work.

The Committee remains concerned about the situation of home and building owners who find themselves in a newly created flood risk area, and the impact this has on their ability to sell and insure their assets. We suggest this issue could be incorporated into future consideration of NPF4 and that a future committee may wish to engage with insurers and mortgage lenders on this issue.

We make the general observation that the Committee's role in relation to scrutinising the work of these bodies is very high level. We are of the view that it would be helpful to set out in the remit of a future committee that they have responsibility for scrutiny of a specific ombudsman or regulator with reference to relevant legislation.

We have undertaken in-depth consideration of the SPSO and the SHR once this session (although we have pursued the issues raised during that work thereafter). We believe that hearing from stakeholders and individuals has been valuable to our work and would recommend that a successor committee may wish to do this on an annual basis. Ideally, it could hear from the same stakeholders to assess progress.

We also believe that a successor committee would benefit from standardised information gathering from the regulators and ombudsman, which would again allow for consistent assessment each year.

Among the reflections and recommendations we made following our in-depth scrutiny of the SPSO in 2024, we wish to highlight that we suggested the powers of the Ombudsman should be reviewed and that legislative change in this area would drive many of the improvements stakeholders, and the SPSO, have called for. A successor committee may wish to instigate this.

We also note that while complaints to the SPSO include those on local authority services, its scope is much wider than this. We believe the committee with responsibility for considering the work of the SPSO could be another committee with a wider overview of public service delivery, perhaps sitting in the public administration area.

Having sought views to support our consideration of the SPSO in 2024, we have heard from people on their individual experiences of engaging with the SPSO. We have previously welcomed the SPSO's efforts to improve how it communicates with complainants and believe this should be monitored by our successor committee.

We are also of the view that engagement with the SPSO can be the last part of a process of attempting to make a complaint about a public body. The SPSO has specific processes both for considering complaints and for its decisions to be challenged. However, thought should be given to whether these processes provide sufficient support for the emotional impact of making a complaint. This is particularly relevant where complainants have exhausted the options in the complaints process as set out.

We recommend that a successor Committee undertake a comprehensive review of the work of the Scottish Housing Regulator (SHR). Ideally, this could take place in the first or second year of the Session and provide a platform on which to build ongoing information gathering and assessment. We suggest this should include hearing from the stakeholders we have written to previously to ensure they have a regular opportunity to provide their views on the work of the SHR. As stated previously, we believe our successor committee should monitor the position of housing cooperatives within Scotland’s housing sector, in particular what actions the SHR and the Scottish Government take to ensure that the sector is able to grow.

We believe regular consideration each year thereafter on how the SHR has progressed areas of interest would be beneficial.

We believe scrutiny of the SHR is an area where the appointment of an adviser to the Committee or the procurement of specialist research could add value.

The Committee recommends that its successor consider how it can best focus its efforts when carrying out pre-budget scrutiny and it should consider how it can assess the impact of this work on the final budget.

We also recommend that our successor should work with other committees to consider how collaboration might improve the overall impact of the Parliament's scrutiny of the budget, particularly on the committee debate.

We recommend our successor committee should hold annual business planning days.

The Committee has found opportunities to discuss issues in depth with people with lived experience to be extremely valuable to our scrutiny. We recommend our successor committee(s) continue with this where specific pieces of work will benefit from this approach.

In particular we benefited from establishing a lived-experience panel to advise us on the Housing (Scotland) Bill and would commend this approach to a successor.

We commend the approaches we have taken to promotion of our work, as well as an openness to innovations, to a successor committee.

We recommend a successor committee continue to find opportunities for informal engagement with stakeholders to support its work.

As part of this, we believe particular focus should be paid to establishing relationships with individual councils.

The Committee would recommend that its successor committee(s) should evaluate its work, including measurement of impact and progress of recommendations throughout the next Session. The Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee has found the production of tracker reports to be an effective way to achieve this.

We believe the areas within our remit have complemented one another and been sufficiently linked to allow us to work efficiently.

The one exception we would highlight is that homelessness has been within the remit of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee this Session. We believe this would have naturally sat with housing and would have made examination of the Housing (Scotland) Bill smoother.

We recognise the work that has already been undertaken on council tax reform and acknowledge there are different views on how this should be progressed. There are several outstanding issues and questions arising from our inquiry on council tax reform which the Committee believes could be pursued as part of future consideration of this issue:
The Scottish Government committed to a debate in the Scottish Parliament in early 2026 informed by the research by the Institute of Fiscal Studies, which has not taken place. A future committee may wish to consider this research if undertaking any work on council tax reform.
The Committee had recommended the Scottish Government should provide a specification to the Scottish Assessors Association to allow it to estimate the cost of overall revaluation. A cost has been estimated in the Budget for 2026-27 for the creation of two additional bands and we were told by the Scottish Government that "The assessors are confident in their assessment of the costs of undertaking the exercise over the two-year period and in the appeals process that they have provided to us...". v Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee, Official Report , 27 January 2026 , Col 42 It is not clear to the Committee whether this has been part of a comprehensive estimate of the costs of recalibrating council tax bands. We have not been provided with the specification for overall revaluation as requested and a future committee may wish to pursue the request for clarity on what assessments have been made of the cost of revaluation.
The public consultation closed on 30 January. We were told a summary of responses would be available in late March or early April. v Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee, Official Report , 27 January 2026 , Col 43 In addition, a wider engagement programme took place in 2025 and the results of this are anticipated to be included in the consultation analysis. The timing of this means the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee has not had the opportunity to consider the results of this exercise.