Section 79 — Local housing strategies

Housing (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3 – in the Scottish Parliament at 5:15 pm on 13 June 2001.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Margaret Curran Margaret Curran Labour

Amendment 134 is a straightforward drafting amendment to bring the definition of special needs housing in section 79 into line with definitions used elsewhere in the bill. I hope that Robert Brown is not too offended by the suggestion that his drafting can be improved on. We have remained true to the spirit of what was discussed at stage 2.

Mike Watson's amendment 175 highlights the link between housing and employment opportunities. Many of the issues are non-legislative and we have made clear our commitment to maximising the employment and training benefit from housing investment through community ownership proposals and in other, more general, ways. However, we recognise Mike Watson's commitment and the work that he has done in this area. We accept the arguments that he has put forward, especially given his familiarity with the issues. We are happy to accept amendment 175. In practice, we expect local authorities to address the issues across the piece—for example, through wider community planning frameworks and local economic forums.

I move amendment 134.

Photo of Mike Watson Mike Watson Labour 5:30, 13 June 2001

Amendment 175 will ensure that local economies benefit as much as possible from the substantial amount of funding that will be devoted to housing over the next few years. To make that possible, it requires that, as part of their local housing strategies, local authorities ensure that sufficient craft apprenticeships are available to provide a long-term supply of local labour for construction and maintenance work. I welcome the minister's comments and the fact that she has recognised the benefits of the amendment, following a discussion on an amendment at stage 2.

There is a need to tackle the serious issues that stem from the fact that a considerable amount of building and construction work takes place in Scotland. I highlight Glasgow in that. That work is carried out by building workers not just from outside the area, but often from outside Scotland and sometimes from outside the UK. I do not play down the need for employment in other parts of the country, or indeed in other parts of Europe, but I think that the main consideration must be for Scotland—and I unashamedly argue the case for Glasgow. If the money that is generated from building work is not recirculated in the local economy, the benefits from that work are seriously reduced.

In the private sector, apprenticeships in the construction industry are almost a thing of the past. There have been numerous examples of companies dispensing with apprenticeship schemes apparently in order to make an economy. Of course, that is a false economy. Luckily, local authorities, often direct labour organisations, have maintained a tradition of skilled apprenticeships—Glasgow provides a particularly good example of that.

The amendment is also about the trade union input to that form of training. I have discussed that issue with the minister. The housing and employment working group was set up in Glasgow last year to identify collective problems and to remove barriers to people getting training in the construction and maintenance trades. The organisations involved in the group include the Scottish Executive, Scottish Homes, Scottish Enterprise, the Employment Service, the Construction Industry Training Board (Scotland), the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and the Scottish Housebuilders Association. No trade unions are included, however. I said to the minister—as I had previously said to her privately—that that was not good enough.

There must be trade union involvement in bodies such as that working group. Immediately after the Parliament was established, the First Minister, in his previous role as Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning, set up the manufacturing industry task force, which had trade union involvement. However, similar groups that have been established since have not had such an involvement. I want trade union involvement to be reinstated.

This is not just about what we think of trade unionism—I obviously believe it to be, fundamentally and thoroughly, a force for good. It is a question of the standards that trade unions demand and establish in the industries in which they have influence. That includes safety standards, particularly in the construction industry, which has horrendous problems—its death rate is the worst of any industry. It is also about decent pay and conditions and about ending the involvement of the bogus self-employed, whom many construction employers utilise.

Those factors contributed to my lodging amendment 175. As the minister said, there are difficulties with employment regulations, in relation not just to the Parliament's ability to discuss them, but to the European Commission restrictions on tendering, for example. It is not clear whether those apply to registered social landlords. After the current inquiry is carried out, I would frankly be surprised if they did not. We need to find an alternative route, which is what amendment 175 is designed to offer.

Photo of Bill Aitken Bill Aitken Conservative

Amendment 134 speaks for itself and amendment 175 has much to commend it. I only point out to Mike Watson that his efforts to maximise the impact of investment in places such as Glasgow through stock transfer will come to nowt, unless we take account of the education process. One of the main failings in the current education system in Glasgow is that there seem to be no opportunities—or at least only very limited ones—for youngsters to learn the crafts and trades that would be of tremendous benefit once the investment comes along.

Despite Mike Watson's rather old-Labour attitude to trade unions, amendment 175 is worthy of support—with the caveat that it will be for the Executive to ensure that the education departments of local authorities are brought firmly on board, as well as further education establishments.

Photo of Margaret Curran Margaret Curran Labour

The work that Bill Aitken suggests is already under way in Glasgow schools. For example, in their final year of school, a number of young people may opt into the first year of a trade. Substantial work is being done in Glasgow and that model is an interesting one.

Mike Watson's point on trade union involvement is significant and I give him complete assurance that we wish to involve trade unions at every possible opportunity. We have received interesting submissions about the work from the GMB, the Transport and General Workers Union and the Amalgamated Engineering and Electrical Union. We look forward to developing a constructive working relationship with the trade unions and I will be pleased to follow up the points that Mike Watson has made.

Amendment 134 agreed to.

Amendment 175 moved—[Mike Watson]—and agreed to.

Amendment 135 moved—[Ms Margaret Curran]—and agreed to.