FM faces backlash over 'disappointing' plans on affordable homes
Delivering his programme for government, Mr Swinney told MSPs his plans would include 'investment in thousands of new homes', however, both Shelter Scotland and the Scottish Federation Of Housing Associations have said there is an 'urgent need' for quicker and bolder action.
The legislative plans include more rights and stronger protections for tenants as well as a re-announced promise to deliver more than 8,000 affordable homes, including for social and mid-market rent. They also promise to remove barriers on stalled building sites 'with the potential to deliver up to 20,000 new homes'.
However, Shelter Scotland believes the plans are not sufficient to tackle Scotland's national housing emergency which was declared a year ago.
Shelter Scotland Director Alison Watson said: 'It is disappointing to hear the Programme for Government today, which lacked crucial detail about how the Scottish Government plans to tackle the housing emergency.
'While we welcome the continuation of the plans which have already been announced, this is simply not enough.
'We are coming up to a year since a national housing emergency was declared. The situation is deteriorating across the country with a record high number of children trapped in temporary accommodation.
'There are still no significant increases in plans for social home building, extra budgets or investment in housing services to prevent more people becoming homeless.'
Read more:
Scotland housing charities urge Swinney commit to homebuilding pledge
Ms Watson added: 'Shelter Scotland wanted a programme for secure homes, but all we have is a programme for homelessness.'
In a debate after the FM delivered a statement on his legislative plans to the parliament, Scottish Labour's Mark Griffin claimed the government has so far failed to get Scotland 'anywhere near' their target of building 110,000 affordable homes by 2032.
His comments after The Herald reported that Scottish housing charities had written to the First Minister urging him to make a pledge to build more homes in his programme for government which he did not commit to.
The MSP added: 'The 8,000 re-announced in the programme for government won't be enough to get that target back on track which I isn't a surprise given that the huge housing budget cut was only partially restored this year.
'Can I ask the First Minister, in line with pleas made by Shelter and Homes for Scotland, to pledge to build the homes we all need or will the 110,000 affordable homes target be another broken promise.'
The First Minister responded to Mr Griffin, stating that the housing budget is 'higher than it was' in the previous year, adding that they have 'remedied that particular issue'.
Mr Swinney said: 'I would just encourage the Labour party to accept the facts and move on, find something else to talk about, find something else to moan given that we've addressed the issue about the budget that we've put in place.
'In Scotland, we have delivered more affordable houses per head of population than in England or in Wales in the face of austerity.
The legislative agenda also included a pledge to deliver the Heating in Buildings aimed at reducing carbon emissions by installing clean heating systems by 2045 - a move welcomed by the SFHA. However, they believe the government could be delivering much bolder action overall.
Responding to the First Minister's plans, SFHA Chief Executive Sally Thomas said: 'The First Minister is right to acknowledge the concern of people unable to find affordable housing: this is an issue that is rapidly rising up the public agenda.
"With nearly a quarter of a million people across Scotland currently on a waiting list for a social home, and a housing emergency declared almost a year ago, it was vital that today's Programme for Government set out coherent action to increase the provision of affordable rented homes.
"The measures announced today are welcome, but don't go far enough to tackle Scotland's dire situation on housing.
'A decent, stable home is the foundation of the fairer, greener and more prosperous Scotland the First Minister wants to build. So we are glad to see continued ambition to build 110,000 affordable homes by 2032. But for this to have any chance of becoming a reality, the Scottish Government must quickly set out multi-year funding commitments, so that our members can plan with confidence to build much-needed homes.
'We are disappointed that there is still no commitment to exempt Mid Market Rent homes from private rented sector rent controls. This type of housing is highly valued by younger people and professionals in particular, but it may become unviable unless the government amends the Housing Bill.
'It is reassuring to see commitment to a Heat in Buildings Bill. But we need certainty on the targets our members will need to meet, as well as a fair and equal approach to the standards required of every housing tenure, including home ownership and private rent. And we had urged government to provide a clear pathway to funding on removing unsafe cladding: we can't allow this burden to fall on social tenants.
'A warm, secure, affordable home is the foundation of all our lives, and while this Programme for Government recognises that, there is an urgent need for quicker, bolder action if we are to end the national housing emergency.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
an hour ago
- Scottish Sun
Scottish Parliament chief to stand down at next Holyrood election
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) HOLYROOD presiding officer Alison Johnstone will stand down as an MSP next year. The former Scottish Greens politician has announced that she won't run in next May's election. Sign up for the Politics newsletter Sign up 2 Alison Johnstone is set to stand down as an MSP Credit: Alamy 2 She has been presiding officer at the Scottish Parliament since 2021 Credit: Alamy Ms Johnstone took on the non-partisan presiding officer position in 2021. Following the last Scottish Parliament election, the Lothians MSP emerged as the only candidate for the Holyrood chamber role. She was elected with 97 votes in favour, 28 against, two abstentions and one spoiled ballot. The job of presiding officer is equivalent to the Speaker of the House of Commons. They are responsible for overseeing business at Holyrood and chairing meetings in the debating chamber. Ms Johnstone, 59, said: 'I was elected in 2011 and it was always my intention that this would be my last term in Holyrood.' She said she did not come from a political background, adding: 'I was not in a political party but campaigned for the creation of a Scottish Parliament and I then worked as an assistant for Robin Harper, the first-ever Green parliamentarian in the UK elected to the first-ever Scottish Parliament.' Recent weeks have seen the Scottish Conservatives accuse Ms Johnstone of bias in her role, an allegation she has always denied. At the end of May, the presiding officer took the rare decision to kick former Tory leader Douglas Ross out of the chamber due to his interjections at First Minister's Questions. During her tenure, Ms Johnstone guided the parliament through the Covid-19 pandemic restrictions, which included implementing social distancing and remote working practices. John Swinney defends Gray's car use after minister was 'driven to pub' She was also heavily involved in the ceremony following the death of Queen Elizabeth II in 2022, when the King visited the Scottish Parliament to hear a special motion of condolence session. Before entering politics, she was a qualified athletics coach and previously held the east of Scotland titles for the 800m and 1,500m.
Powys County Times
2 hours ago
- Powys County Times
Bluetongue rules 'risk devastating farmers' along the border
The Welsh Government have been warned that Bluetongue rules 'risk devastating farmers and livestock markets right the way along the border. MP for Brecon, Radnorshire and Cwm Tawe David Chadwick and Welsh Liberal Democrat leader Jane Dodds have demanded urgent action to support farmers in Powys and across the Welsh marches. New rules set to come into force on July 1 will see sheep unable to cross the Welsh border unless it has had a bluetongue test, even if it has been vaccinated, which can cost as much as £70 per animal. The Welsh Government has relaxed rules on cattle to allow vaccinated animals to enter, however sheep will not be subject to the change despite there being over 8 million sheep being farmed in Wales in 2024. Much of the trade taking place across the England-Wales border and local farmer James Gittins warned that "in the worst-case scenario, we are going to see the numbers of lambs produced in Wales drop by 10 to 20 per cent, from which it may never recover." Livestock markets such as Builth, Prestige and Welshpool are also set to be massively hit by the rules. In Westminster on Thursday, Mr Chadwick questioned the UK Government EFRA Minister about how it plans to prevent a de facto veterinary hard border between England and Wales and protect cross-border farms from economic harm. Chadwick warned that the cost of testing 'is a devastating burden our local farmers cannot afford to take on at a time they are already under such significant financial pressure'. While acknowledging the seriousness of the issue, the Minister declined to commit to additional support, citing devolved powers. 'These sudden and costly changes risk devastating farmers and livestock markets right the way along the border,' said Mr Chadwick. 'Cross-border movement is essential to how agriculture works in this region, it's not optional. If nothing changes, this will do serious damage to rural livelihoods and the local economy. 'We need urgent coordination between the Welsh and UK Governments to ease the burden and protect our farms.' In the Senedd, Jane Dodds raised the impact the policy is having on farmers' mental health, and urged the Welsh Government to work more closely together with a focus on vaccination over an unworkable testing and licensing scheme. Both representatives are calling for a joined-up, four-nation response to bluetongue, including surge funding for testing and vaccination. 'I've spoken with farmers, vets, and local markets and the message is clear, the current plan is unworkable,' said Ms Dodds. 'Testing is costly, slow, and does nothing to support already stressed farm communities. 'Vaccination must be at the heart of our response. We need a united approach between both Cardiff and London that puts farmers' wellbeing and practical realities first.'
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Keir Starmer accidentally admits his first year has been a failure
It is the sort of thing a backbencher who is trying to be loyal would say. Which is damning, and particularly so from the prime minister himself, because a core part of his job is communicating the government's 'story'. He was asked in Canada on Wednesday what his biggest mistake had been in his first year in government. 'We haven't always told our story as well as we should,' he said. Most politicians would have bristled at the obvious trap laid by Beth Rigby of Sky News, but Keir Starmer is a surprisingly low-ego politician. No other British prime minister would have bent down to pick up the trade deal papers that Donald Trump dropped. Most other prime ministers would have ignored Rigby's invitation to criticise themselves, especially as the second half of a two-part question, but Starmer came back to it willingly after answering the first part (what are you most proud of? 'Three million extra appointments in the NHS'). He is not self-important, which I admire about him, but he is ruthless and confident. Confident enough not to notice or care that the photographers are recording him scrabbling at the president's feet, and confident enough to give a serious answer to an obviously silly question. Unfortunately for him, it was a bad answer. Communication is not an optional add-on to democratic politics; it is the essence of it. Poor communication is usually an excuse not an explanation. It is the code to be used when a government becomes unpopular but people do not want to imply that the leader is the problem. Poor communications and bad advisers get the blame. It was ever thus: when parliament criticised Charles I's advisers; when Margaret Thatcher was told to get rid of Alan Walters, her economic adviser. Charles I was urged to get his message across better to MPs by denouncing popery; Thatcher was urged to sell the poll tax better by calling it the community charge. In both cases, it wasn't the advisers or the communications that were the problem. So it is with Starmer. MPs grumble about Morgan McSweeney, the prime minister's chief of staff. They blame him for the 'right-wing' policies that they don't like. They have all read Get In, the book about how Labour won the election by Patrick Maguire and Gabriel Pogrund, which portrays McSweeney as the mastermind and strategic genius behind a campaign for which Starmer is often the passive figurehead. This is often developed, by MPs who 'didn't come into politics to cut support for the disabled', into a fairytale in which Starmer, a proper socialist who shares Ed Miliband's politics (like them), has been taken prisoner by his Blairite chief of staff. If that is an attempt to avoid direct criticism of their leader, it fails, because it makes him look weak and dishonest. But it is also wrong. In the end, the leader always takes responsibility for decisions. Nor is Starmer simply McSweeney's puppet. A telling report in the Financial Times on Wednesday revealed that the plan to treat Nigel Farage even more publicly as the real leader of the opposition came from Starmer himself, and not McSweeney: it was the prime minister's idea to travel to St Helens to deliver a speech as a direct response to Farage's pitch for Labour votes. Farage is the main threat to Labour at the next election, but it may be that McSweeney has doubts about the prime minister himself saying so in public. The 'poor communications' line is just as bad – and it is a defence that Starmer deploys himself. What does he mean when he says 'we' could have 'explained our decisions in the way that might in retrospect have been better'? Could he have said to pensioners on modest incomes, 'We're going to take away your winter fuel payment, but don't worry, next year we will pretend that the economy is getting better and give it back to you'? The reason his government's decisions have not been explained better is that they were bad decisions. In retrospect, as he put it, he should have stopped Rachel Reeves cutting the winter fuel payment. Looking back, he shouldn't have promised to ' smash the gangs ' with no idea how to do it. Looking further back, he should have put someone with his full authority in charge of preparing for government. These are not examples of failing to tell the government's story 'as well as we should': they reveal a government with no story to tell, or even, quite often, with the wrong story to tell. Starmer has shown that he can learn, and he seems to have no fear of U-turning from the wrong policy to the right one. So maybe he can recover from the false start of his first year – but it will be achieved by making better decisions, not by 'telling a better story'.
