Section 91 — Improvement grants: the tolerable standard and standard amenities

Housing (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3 – in the Scottish Parliament at 6:00 pm on 13th June 2001.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party 6:00 pm, 13th June 2001

Group 29 deals with improvement grants and the meaning of "tolerable standard". Amendment 10, in the name of Tricia Marwick, is grouped with amendments 140, 141, 11, 142, 143 and 144.

Photo of Tricia Marwick Tricia Marwick Scottish National Party

Amendments 10 and 11 are exactly the same as amendments that I lodged and that were disagreed to at stage 2. I look forward to the minister addressing the amendments this time, which she failed to do at stage 2.

The tolerable standard for Scottish housing was set over 30 years ago. In England, housing has to meet a fitness standard, which, in terms of quality, is set far higher than the standard that we have in Scotland. In October 1997, Malcolm Chisholm, when he was the Scottish Office minister with responsibility for housing, said:

"it is clear that too many people in Scotland still live in poor housing conditions. ... A further cause for concern is that so many houses fall 'Below Tolerable Standard', even though that Standard was set almost 30 years ago and is now out of date."

If it was out of date in 1997, it is even more out of date now. A Scottish Office consultation was concluded in 1998. Since then, there has been barely a cheep from the Executive about what it intends to do with the responses that it received to the consultation document. Indeed, it was clear at stage 2 that the Executive still does not intend to act on the tolerable standard in Scotland. It prefers to kick the whole matter into touch with the housing improvement task force and an index of housing quality.

The tolerable standard is, and should remain, a minimum standard below which no house should fall. It is not an aspirational standard that sets the optimum housing standards, nor should it be. The minimum standard has three purposes, as the Scottish Office outlined in its 1997 consultation paper: to identify defects that unless remedied could result in the loss of the house to the housing stock; to identify issues of health and safety of the occupants; and to target resources. I agree with those three purposes. In its report, the committee recommended that a wider definition of tolerable standard be introduced.

Amendments 10 and 11 are very modest and do no more than adopt the English fitness standard, which is under review. The wording of my amendments was chosen with great care. Amendment 10 inserts the phrase:

"and is free from serious disrepair".

At stage 2, the minister said:

"Considerable subjectivity is involved in measuring serious disrepair."—[Official Report, Social Justice Committee, 15 May 2001; c 2438.]

What a lot of mince. The wording in amendment 10 is exactly the wording of the English fitness standard. If serious disrepair can be understood by our friends and colleagues in England, it can also be understood in Scotland.

Photo of Cathie Craigie Cathie Craigie Labour

If the member is as experienced in housing as she claims to be, does she agree that the term "serious disrepair" has allowed housing officers up and down the country to delay repairs and not reach agreement with applicants on repair and improvement grants? Does she further agree that that term needs to be defined or changed?

Photo of Tricia Marwick Tricia Marwick Scottish National Party

In England, there appears to be no great difficulty with the term "serious disrepair". If the Scottish ministers cannot even accept that wording as a measure, they are suggesting that they can do nothing about the tolerable standard. I do not accept that.

Amendment 11 specifies that housing should be

"free from dampness prejudicial to the health of the occupants".

Again, that is the wording of the English fitness standard. No doubt Cathie Craigie will tell me that people up and down the country do not understand what it means.

The Scottish Executive is still dragging its feet on the tolerable standard in Scotland. The Labour Government has been consulting since 1998 and is still consulting. In evidence, Glasgow City Council said that

"the tolerable standard is not adequate for today's housing."—[Official Report, Local Government Committee, 23 January 2001; c 1447.]

The Royal Incorporation of Architects in Scotland called for early action to raise the tolerable standard. In its briefing, Shelter Scotland—I agree with it sometimes—said that it was ironic that an amendment had been adopted to eradicate fuel poverty in 15 years, yet condensation, dampness and disrepair were not addressed.

I find it hard to believe that we are debating a housing bill—the Executive's flagship policy—that will do nothing to target for improvement the worst housing. The bill will not give to tenants the statutory right to live in a house of decent quality. That is a disgrace and a wasted opportunity. It is intolerable that in the 21st century we have a standard for Scottish housing that has its roots in the 19th century. Even at this late stage, I urge the ministers to accept the minimal amendments that I have lodged.

I move amendment 10.

Photo of Tommy Sheridan Tommy Sheridan SSP 6:15 pm, 13th June 2001

I will be more optimistic than Tricia Marwick. I agree with all the points that she has made, but I think, in the words of Shelter, that this process should be an opportunity to take a radical look at the minimum standards of the homes in which people have to live.

In a letter to me in support of amendments 140, 141 and 142, Shelter Scotland said:

"I am writing in support of the above amendments to the Housing (Scotland) Bill that you have tabled.

At least 362,000 children and 119,000 pensioners live in homes that are affected by dampness and condensation. Much of Scotland's housing is in an appalling condition; the Housing (Scotland) Bill should be an opportunity to begin to tackle this. The effects of dampness and condensation can cause or exacerbate respiratory illnesses like asthma, bronchitis and pneumonia. 1 in 3 children who experience breathing problems live in houses that suffer from dampness or condensation.

We have argued since 1998 (when the Scottish Office held a review of the Tolerable Standard) for condensation dampness to be included in the tolerable standard. Our briefing paper 'Beyond the Tolerable Standard' sets out Shelter's position.

The briefing paper also supports the case for a measure of energy efficiency in the Tolerable Standard. In the briefing paper we argue for different temperature levels than your amendment but we do nevertheless support the principle of your amendment.

I hope your amendments get a fair hearing".

Quite frankly, I hope that my amendments get a fair hearing as well. Surely we have an opportunity to set a minimum standard for the housing conditions that we expect our citizens to live in. The amendments in this group do not have the same resource implication that earlier amendments for which I tried to get support would have. We are setting a standard and sending out the message that homes that do not meet that standard are not acceptable—they are below tolerable standard.

Surely we should have a 21st century below tolerable standard instead of a 19th century below tolerable standard. That is the vision that we should be setting up. The Housing (Scotland) Bill gives us an opportunity to say that homes should be free of condensation and dampness, and should be capable of being heated with less than 10 per cent of a family's household expenditure—the accepted definition of fuel poverty. We have the opportunity to say that houses should have a form of central heating and should have safe and operable double-glazed window units, to ensure that all citizens have the type of environment that many of us take for granted in our own homes.

All that I am asking is that we set the highest possible minimum measure for the citizens of Scotland in relation to housing. We have the opportunity to do that by including in the below tolerable standard the measures that are set out in amendments 140, 141 and 142. Those amendments have no immediate resource implication; they merely set a measure that I hope local authorities will be properly financed and resourced to meet within a reasonable period. I appeal to the ministers to recognise that those amendments are meant to raise our sights in Scotland and to give us the type of tolerable standard for our housing that we can be proud of.

Photo of Karen Whitefield Karen Whitefield Labour

I listened with interest to Tommy Sheridan and Tricia Marwick. I do not doubt for a minute their aspirations for the citizens of Scotland—they are shared by every member on the Executive benches—but they have not said what their amendments would do to ensure that people live in warm and secure homes. In reality, the amendments do not do anything. The tolerable standard is about condemning homes for demolition, not about improving houses that are not necessarily obsolete.

Photo of Linda Fabiani Linda Fabiani Scottish National Party

I point out that the tolerable standard is often used to define the levels at which grants and development funding can be given, particularly in housing action areas, so it is not merely about earmarking properties for demolition.

Photo of Karen Whitefield Karen Whitefield Labour

The reality is that the amendments in this group add nothing. Classing properties as below the tolerable standard is about defining houses that are morally and physically due for demolition. We need an index of quality and comfort that captures the aims and aspirations of the people of Scotland and housing need in Scotland and to allow the tolerable standard to pick up housing failures. That is why the amendments are unworkable.

I accept that the SNP may have some sympathy for improving the tolerable standard, because it improved matters in the 1970s and 1980s, but now is the time for raising our aspirations. That is exactly what the housing improvement task force will do.

Photo of Karen Whitefield Karen Whitefield Labour

I am sorry; I am about to conclude.

That is also exactly what the index of housing quality will do. This morning, Shona Robison told us that we should wait for the review on asylum seekers. We should wait for the work of the housing improvement task force. The SNP should not pre-empt it. Allow us to engage in the process and I am sure that we will produce something more satisfactory than what Tommy Sheridan and Tricia Marwick's amendments would achieve.

Photo of Bill Aitken Bill Aitken Conservative

The point about the definition of the tolerable standard is well made. What was regarded as acceptable in 1850 would not have been acceptable in 1950 and what was regarded as the norm then would not be taken as the norm in 2001. That is accepted and understood, but there are definitional problems and resource implications in what the amendments propose.

Our colleagues down south may well have produced a definition of "serious disrepair", but many of the terms in this series of amendments are not clear. What is "substantially free"? How do we define that? There is a problem with putting the proposals in these amendments in an act of Parliament.

We would all like every public sector house to have windows of double-glazed construction that operate safely. Nobody could argue with that, but consider how much it could cost in the short term.

The Conservatives are content to wait and see what the housing improvement task force produces. We assure the minister that, if progress is not made, we will take measures to persuade her that urgent action must be taken.

Photo of Robert Brown Robert Brown Liberal Democrat

The Social Justice Committee had a good debate on section 91 at stage 2. The section had perhaps not been given as full consideration as it might have been in the committee's lead-up investigations.

I said at the time that the committee's general mood was to move forward on the issue of the tolerable standard. I am indebted to the committee for its comments and also to the ministers for the subsequent discussions that I have had with them on the matter.

There is a definitional difficulty. People are talking about several different issues. Tommy Sheridan managed, in one sentence, to say that the proposal on the tolerable standard had no resource implications and that he was looking forward to local authorities being resourced to implement it. We must be reasonably rigorous. The proposal has resource implications and it is a tool of housing policy.

There is agreement throughout the chamber that we want to move forward on the tolerable standard, not least on damp houses. It is common sense that a damp house is not a house that it is tolerable to live in, but that is not quite the point for the purpose of this debate. Ministers already have powers under section 86 of the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987 to extend or amplify the criteria for the tolerable standard. That could be done by statutory instrument.

I am not interested, to use Tommy Sheridan's words, in sending out a message. The point is to have a programme that ensures that substantial improvements are made to the state of Scotland's housing. The measures that the Administration set out mentioned using the index of housing quality as the main aspirational standard. There is, of course, a difference between an aspirational standard and a minimum standard. Linda Fabiani is right to say that it is not just a matter of the tolerable standard leading to demolition; it also has implications for access to mandatory grants. That makes the point: how do we decide on the best use of limited resources in this context? Is the tolerable standard the best way of moving forward or are there better ways to achieve results?

I would like to see some progress. The housing improvement task force is examining the issue. It is important that it considers it in some depth and takes whatever time is necessary. At the same time, there is a mood in the chamber that the housing improvement task force should produce a reasonably speedy report. I am interested to hear what time scales the ministers have in mind for the production of the report. As we are considering the usefulness of the tolerable standard as a weapon, I am also interested in knowing whether, after the report has been produced, the ministers will be prepared—if necessary—to use their existing powers to extend the definition of the tolerable standard or to legislate further to move the issue on.

My final point on this difficult area is this: we are debating the Housing (Scotland) Bill, but we cannot improve housing just with a flash of legislative change. A programme of measures must accompany any such legislation; the important link is between the provisions in the bill and the administrative and financial resource implications of those provisions as determined by ministers. I want some progress and some response from the ministers on that.

Photo of Jackie Baillie Jackie Baillie Labour

There is obviously strong feeling across the chamber about the tolerable standard and many members care deeply about housing quality. No one can say that the Executive, or my colleagues on the Labour and Liberal Democrat benches, have neglected the issue or failed to give it full attention. In a moment or two, I will talk about the wider picture, but I will first respond to the amendments.

The tolerable standard is not a list that details the items and appliances that houses should have. Rather, it is a standard that condemns; it seeks to identify houses with defects that seriously threaten the integrity of the building and, as a result, the health and safety of the occupants and possibly others. It can be the trigger for drastic action such as demolition or for mandatory action by the owner.

All the amendments in the group propose additions to the tolerable standard, but we cannot simply add items to the tolerable standard without first thinking through whether they are appropriate and what the effect of adding them will be. As my deputy Margaret Curran said in the lively stage 2 debate, the Executive believes that the tolerable standard must meet four tests.

First, if the tolerable standard is to be meaningful in determining priorities for housing investment, it must identify elements of house condition that, if not identified, would seriously threaten the building's integrity. It must focus on housing in the very worst condition to ensure that such housing receives investment first. Secondly, the tolerable standard must be easily measured. Thirdly, the condition of the property must be sufficiently serious to warrant the use of the quite draconian statutory powers that legislation gives local authorities, such as powers of compulsion over owners, and the award of mandatory improvement grants. Fourthly, the tolerable standard cannot be dependent on household type or income.

I do not believe that any of the amendments in the group meets those tests in full. Tricia Marwick's amendment 10 proposes that "serious disrepair" be added to the tolerable standard.

Although I have much sympathy with the intention, the fact is that serious disrepair need not threaten the fabric of a building. The elements of disrepair that are fundamental to the integrity of the building are already included in the standard.

Tommy Sheridan's amendments 140 and 141 and Tricia Marwick's amendment 11 all concern dampness or condensation damp. The tolerable standard already requires that a house should be substantially free from rising and penetrating damp.

Photo of Andrew Welsh Andrew Welsh Scottish National Party

On a point of clarification, does the minister intend to alter the minimum tolerable standard in any way?

Photo of Jackie Baillie Jackie Baillie Labour

If the member allows me to develop my speech, he will find out what we intend to do. This is a complex area and I am prepared to give a very fulsome answer.

I understand the concerns about condensation damp. Indeed, many of our biggest programmes are aimed at tackling that problem. As I have said, I will talk about the wider picture.

Tommy Sheridan's amendment 142 covers the temperature of the house and expenditure on heating. As those factors are dependent on the income of the occupants, they go beyond the condition of the building, which is what the standard is about.

Photo of Tommy Sheridan Tommy Sheridan SSP

Does the minister recognise that amendment 142 contains the recognised definition of fuel poverty?

Photo of Jackie Baillie Jackie Baillie Labour 6:30 pm, 13th June 2001

The tolerable standard deals with a building's condition. I can accept definitions of fuel poverty, but we are not discussing those. For that reason, Tommy Sheridan's amendment is wrong in this context.

Amendment 143, which would require a house to have double-glazing that can be operated safely, is evidently desirable. We would all agree on that, but it is not the first priority for housing investment. The same applies to the provisions in amendment 144.

The Executive's opposition to extending the tolerable standard is the result not of a lack of commitment or of a failure to understand the problems, but of our belief that changes to the tolerable standard are not the most effective method of achieving the improvement that we all want.

We already have in place strategies that are designed to promote housing quality and to improve the living conditions of households in Scotland. When we came into office we said that we would insulate 100,000 houses over a four- year term. Under the warm deal, we have already insulated 80,000 houses and we will exceed our target. Through the central heating programme we are committed to ensuring that within five years all tenants of social landlords and all elderly people have free central heating, home insulation, safety alarms, energy advice and a benefits health check. We are working in partnership with local authorities to improve home energy efficiency under the Home Energy Conservation Act 1995.

We are building on our commitments. The Housing (Scotland) Bill will make major changes to the improvement and repairs grants system. Local authorities will be encouraged to give grants for home insulation, heating systems and home security measures. For the first time, the grants system will be an effective means of tackling condensation damp and fuel poverty.

Finally, the new housing partnership programme will transform Scotland's housing by extending community ownership. Community ownership will provide new resources to address poor housing.

I say to the SNP that we are not happy to rest on those achievements. We believe that we need to take further radical steps to address housing quality. Critically, a more strategic approach is required that takes account of changes. I am referring not just to the higher expectations of housing quality that we all share, but to the wider changes that have taken place since the tolerable standard and the improvement and repairs grant schemes were introduced.

Photo of Fiona Hyslop Fiona Hyslop Scottish National Party

The minister has talked about her achievements. She mentioned the central heating initiative. She knows fine well that barely 8,000 properties in the whole of Scotland—not the 100,000 that she mentioned—are likely to benefit from that scheme. She spoke about achievements under the new housing partnership programme. Perhaps she could tell us exactly how much investment there has been in housing—in bricks and mortar—over the past four years, since the new housing partnerships came into being. The problem is that the Executive has underspent and that there has been no investment in housing under new Labour.

Photo of Jackie Baillie Jackie Baillie Labour

Fiona Hyslop has her facts wrong. There has been significant new investment in housing under the Labour-Liberal Democrat partnership Executive.

I want to take up the point that Fiona Hyslop made about central heating. She is correct to say that central heating is required in fewer council houses, because Labour local authorities have acted in the interests of tenants by installing central heating. I have some good news for Fiona Hyslop. That means that our pensioners and council tenants get central heating more quickly.

As Tricia Marwick said, the English tolerable standard is being reviewed. because it represents an outdated approach. The Scottish Executive has proposed and consulted on an index of housing quality, which is intended to set a much higher standard for housing quality in Scotland than the tolerable standard sets. That index will form a key part of local housing strategies and local authorities will be required to set targets for improvements in their housing covering all aspects of the index. The key elements that are proposed are that a property should be energy efficient, free from serious disrepair, safe and secure and fit for the needs of the occupant. In the light of the discussion that took place in the Social Justice Committee and subsequent helpful discussions that I have had with Robert Brown, Cathie Craigie and others, I have already decided that the index should explicitly recognise the problem of condensation dampness.

We see the index of housing quality as the prime method for driving up standards in housing in Scotland in all tenures. Local authorities will have to set objectives and report on their progress in meeting them. Beyond that, we have started a fundamental review—through the housing improvement task force—of the legislative, financial and other arrangements for promoting and maintaining homes in good condition. The task force was set up because of the complexity of the issues that are involved and we will ensure that it reports on whether the tolerable standard remains appropriate in content and approach. A series of well thought out and connected actions to achieve real change and improvement is the right approach to creating a robust framework that will have a lasting effect.

Photo of Robert Brown Robert Brown Liberal Democrat

Can the minister give us any indication of the time scale for that review?

Photo of Jackie Baillie Jackie Baillie Labour

Yes, I can. The proposed time scale is for a two-stage process. The first stage is to identify the problem and should be completed by the end of this year. A report will then come back on possible solutions. However, I am happy to consider whether we can accelerate that process.

I have set out the measures that are already in place, the changes that we have made through the bill and the further work that is taking place to reform the housing improvement framework. The Parliament should not doubt the Executive's commitment to improving housing conditions in Scotland—not just in a piecemeal way or on a short-term basis, but in the creation of homes that are fit for the 21st century.

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

I remind members that the knife falls at 18:43—seven minutes from now—after which I shall group all remaining amendments.

Photo of Tricia Marwick Tricia Marwick Scottish National Party

I shall be brief, as the minister's response deserves only a brief reply. I find it difficult to debate a housing bill that goes nowhere near ensuring the minimum standards of housing in which people should be living in the 21 st century.

The minister said that she does not want to be rushed, and that the bill is not the opportunity to address the tolerable standard. I wonder whether four years is rushing consultation. The consultation concluded in October 1998. What about the responses? The Executive has been considering them for almost three years, yet it has done nothing. It has wasted this opportunity to put into statute that which should be a basic right in housing.

The minister says that there is to be an index of housing quality. I said in my opening speech—and I wish that Karen Whitefield would pay attention, instead of talking to her colleague—that an index of housing quality will not give tenants a statutory right to have their houses dealt with. That is the difference between an index and a tolerable standard in legislation.

The Executive talks about minimum standards and aspirations. The SNP wants the Executive to aspire to a minimum standard for housing. The minister responded to Robert Brown's question about the time scale for the present review, but by the time the Executive deals with housing that is below the tolerable standard, the pyramids could have been built.

There has been considerable concern among members about housing that is below tolerable standard and the lack of a response from the minister. I therefore urge members to support amendments 10 and 11, which would give tenants statutory rights that the Executive is prepared to deny them.

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 10 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 56

For: Adam, Brian, Campbell, Colin, Canavan, Dennis, Crawford, Bruce, Cunningham, Roseanna, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fabiani, Linda, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Grahame, Christine, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Hyslop, Fiona, Ingram, Mr Adam, Lochhead, Richard, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, MacDonald, Ms Margo, Marwick, Tricia, Matheson, Michael, McGugan, Irene, McLeod, Fiona, Morgan, Alasdair, Paterson, Mr Gil, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Robison, Shona, Russell, Michael, Sheridan, Tommy, Stevenson, Stewart, Sturgeon, Nicola, Ullrich, Kay, Welsh, Mr Andrew, White, Ms Sandra, Wilson, Andrew
Against: Aitken, Bill, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Brown, Robert, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Curran, Ms Margaret, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Eadie, Helen, Fergusson, Alex, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Gallie, Phil, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Gorrie, Donald, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Harding, Mr Keith, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Jenkins, Ian, Johnstone, Alex, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Lyon, George, Macdonald, Lewis, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, MacKay, Angus, MacLean, Kate, Macmillan, Maureen, Martin, Paul, McAllion, Mr John, McAveety, Mr Frank, McCabe, Mr Tom, McConnell, Mr Jack, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay, McLetchie, David, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Monteith, Mr Brian, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Mundell, David, Munro, John Farquhar, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Radcliffe, Nora, Raffan, Mr Keith, Robson, Euan, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Scott, Tavish, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Mrs Margaret, Stone, Mr Jamie, Thomson, Elaine, Tosh, Mr Murray, Wallace, Ben, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 34, Against 82, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 10 disagreed to.

Photo of Phil Gallie Phil Gallie Conservative

On a point of order. [ Applause. ]

Photo of Phil Gallie Phil Gallie Conservative

On a point of order, can you stop Kenny Gibson speaking so we can all stay awake?

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

In response to that, I can say that we are through the final substantive debate. I propose simply to run through votes until the end, if that is agreed. Are we all agreed?

Members:

indicated agreement.

[Amendment 140 moved—[Tommy Sheridan].]

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 140 be agreed to. Are we all agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 57

For: Adam, Brian, Campbell, Colin, Canavan, Dennis, Crawford, Bruce, Cunningham, Roseanna, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fabiani, Linda, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Grahame, Christine, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Hyslop, Fiona, Ingram, Mr Adam, Lochhead, Richard, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, MacDonald, Ms Margo, Marwick, Tricia, Matheson, Michael, McGugan, Irene, McLeod, Fiona, Morgan, Alasdair, Paterson, Mr Gil, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Robison, Shona, Russell, Michael, Sheridan, Tommy, Stevenson, Stewart, Sturgeon, Nicola, Ullrich, Kay, Welsh, Mr Andrew, White, Ms Sandra, Wilson, Andrew
Against: Aitken, Bill, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Brown, Robert, Butler, Bill, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Curran, Ms Margaret, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Eadie, Helen, Fergusson, Alex, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Gallie, Phil, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Gorrie, Donald, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Harding, Mr Keith, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Jenkins, Ian, Johnstone, Alex, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Lyon, George, Macdonald, Lewis, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, MacKay, Angus, MacLean, Kate, Macmillan, Maureen, Martin, Paul, McAllion, Mr John, McAveety, Mr Frank, McCabe, Mr Tom, McConnell, Mr Jack, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay, McLetchie, David, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Monteith, Mr Brian, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Mundell, David, Munro, John Farquhar, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Radcliffe, Nora, Raffan, Mr Keith, Robson, Euan, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Scott, Tavish, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Mrs Margaret, Stone, Mr Jamie, Thomson, Elaine, Tosh, Mr Murray, Wallace, Ben, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 34, Against 83, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 140 disagreed to.

[Amendment 141 moved—[Tommy Sheridan].]

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 141 be agreed to. Are we all agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 58

For: Adam, Brian, Campbell, Colin, Canavan, Dennis, Crawford, Bruce, Cunningham, Roseanna, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fabiani, Linda, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Grahame, Christine, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Hyslop, Fiona, Ingram, Mr Adam, Lochhead, Richard, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, MacDonald, Ms Margo, Marwick, Tricia, Matheson, Michael, McGugan, Irene, McLeod, Fiona, Morgan, Alasdair, Paterson, Mr Gil, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Robison, Shona, Russell, Michael, Sheridan, Tommy, Stevenson, Stewart, Sturgeon, Nicola, Ullrich, Kay, Welsh, Mr Andrew, White, Ms Sandra, Wilson, Andrew
Against: Aitken, Bill, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Brown, Robert, Butler, Bill, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Curran, Ms Margaret, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Eadie, Helen, Fergusson, Alex, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Gallie, Phil, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Gorrie, Donald, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Harding, Mr Keith, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Jenkins, Ian, Johnstone, Alex, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Lyon, George, Macdonald, Lewis, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, MacKay, Angus, MacLean, Kate, Macmillan, Maureen, Martin, Paul, McAllion, Mr John, McAveety, Mr Frank, McCabe, Mr Tom, McConnell, Mr Jack, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay, McLetchie, David, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Monteith, Mr Brian, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Mundell, David, Munro, John Farquhar, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Radcliffe, Nora, Raffan, Mr Keith, Robson, Euan, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Scott, Tavish, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Mrs Margaret, Stone, Mr Jamie, Thomson, Elaine, Tosh, Mr Murray, Wallace, Ben, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 34, Against 83, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 141 disagreed to.

[Amendment 11 moved—[Tricia Marwick].]

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 11 be agreed to. Are we all agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 59

For: Adam, Brian, Campbell, Colin, Canavan, Dennis, Crawford, Bruce, Cunningham, Roseanna, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fabiani, Linda, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Grahame, Christine, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Hyslop, Fiona, Ingram, Mr Adam, Lochhead, Richard, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, MacDonald, Ms Margo, Marwick, Tricia, Matheson, Michael, McGugan, Irene, McLeod, Fiona, Morgan, Alasdair, Paterson, Mr Gil, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Robison, Shona, Russell, Michael, Sheridan, Tommy, Stevenson, Stewart, Sturgeon, Nicola, Ullrich, Kay, Welsh, Mr Andrew, White, Ms Sandra, Wilson, Andrew
Against: Aitken, Bill, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Brown, Robert, Butler, Bill, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Curran, Ms Margaret, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Eadie, Helen, Fergusson, Alex, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Gallie, Phil, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Gorrie, Donald, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Harding, Mr Keith, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Jenkins, Ian, Johnstone, Alex, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Lyon, George, Macdonald, Lewis, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, MacKay, Angus, MacLean, Kate, Macmillan, Maureen, Martin, Paul, McAllion, Mr John, McAveety, Mr Frank, McCabe, Mr Tom, McConnell, Mr Jack, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay, McLetchie, David, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Monteith, Mr Brian, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Mundell, David, Munro, John Farquhar, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Radcliffe, Nora, Raffan, Mr Keith, Robson, Euan, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Scott, Tavish, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Mrs Margaret, Stone, Mr Jamie, Thomson, Elaine, Tosh, Mr Murray, Wallace, Ben, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 34, Against 83, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 11 disagreed to.

Amendment 142 moved—[Tommy Sheridan].

Members:

No.

Division number 60

For: Canavan, Dennis, Sheridan, Tommy
Against: Adam, Brian, Aitken, Bill, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Brown, Robert, Butler, Bill, Campbell, Colin, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Crawford, Bruce, Cunningham, Roseanna, Curran, Ms Margaret, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Eadie, Helen, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fabiani, Linda, Fergusson, Alex, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Gallie, Phil, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Gorrie, Donald, Grahame, Christine, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Harding, Mr Keith, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Hyslop, Fiona, Ingram, Mr Adam, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Jenkins, Ian, Johnstone, Alex, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Lochhead, Richard, Lyon, George, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, Macdonald, Lewis, MacDonald, Ms Margo, MacKay, Angus, MacLean, Kate, Macmillan, Maureen, Martin, Paul, Marwick, Tricia, Matheson, Michael, McAllion, Mr John, McAveety, Mr Frank, McCabe, Mr Tom, McConnell, Mr Jack, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McGugan, Irene, McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay, McLeod, Fiona, McLetchie, David, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Monteith, Mr Brian, Morgan, Alasdair, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Mundell, David, Munro, John Farquhar, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Paterson, Mr Gil, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Radcliffe, Nora, Raffan, Mr Keith, Robison, Shona, Robson, Euan, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Russell, Michael, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Scott, Tavish, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Mrs Margaret, Stevenson, Stewart, Stone, Mr Jamie, Sturgeon, Nicola, Thomson, Elaine, Tosh, Mr Murray, Ullrich, Kay, Wallace, Ben, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Welsh, Mr Andrew, White, Ms Sandra, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan, Wilson, Andrew

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 2, Against 114, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 142 disagreed to.

[Amendment 143 moved—[Tommy Sheridan].]

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 143 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 61

For: Canavan, Dennis, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Sheridan, Tommy
Against: Adam, Brian, Aitken, Bill, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Brown, Robert, Butler, Bill, Campbell, Colin, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Crawford, Bruce, Cunningham, Roseanna, Curran, Ms Margaret, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Eadie, Helen, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fabiani, Linda, Fergusson, Alex, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Gallie, Phil, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Gorrie, Donald, Grahame, Christine, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Harding, Mr Keith, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Hyslop, Fiona, Ingram, Mr Adam, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Jenkins, Ian, Johnstone, Alex, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Lochhead, Richard, Lyon, George, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, Macdonald, Lewis, MacDonald, Ms Margo, MacKay, Angus, MacLean, Kate, Macmillan, Maureen, Martin, Paul, Marwick, Tricia, Matheson, Michael, McAllion, Mr John, McAveety, Mr Frank, McCabe, Mr Tom, McConnell, Mr Jack, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McGugan, Irene, McLeod, Fiona, McLetchie, David, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Monteith, Mr Brian, Morgan, Alasdair, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Mundell, David, Munro, John Farquhar, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Paterson, Mr Gil, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Radcliffe, Nora, Raffan, Mr Keith, Robison, Shona, Robson, Euan, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Russell, Michael, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Scott, Tavish, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Mrs Margaret, Stevenson, Stewart, Stone, Mr Jamie, Sturgeon, Nicola, Tosh, Mr Murray, Ullrich, Kay, Wallace, Ben, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Welsh, Mr Andrew, White, Ms Sandra, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan, Wilson, Andrew

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 3, Against 110, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 143 disagreed to.

[Amendment 144 moved—[Tommy Sheridan].]

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 144 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 62

For: Adam, Brian, Campbell, Colin, Canavan, Dennis, Crawford, Bruce, Cunningham, Roseanna, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fabiani, Linda, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Grahame, Christine, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Hyslop, Fiona, Ingram, Mr Adam, Lochhead, Richard, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, MacDonald, Ms Margo, Marwick, Tricia, Matheson, Michael, McGugan, Irene, McLeod, Fiona, Morgan, Alasdair, Paterson, Mr Gil, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Robison, Shona, Russell, Michael, Sheridan, Tommy, Stevenson, Stewart, Sturgeon, Nicola, Ullrich, Kay, Welsh, Mr Andrew, White, Ms Sandra, Wilson, Andrew
Against: Aitken, Bill, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Brown, Robert, Butler, Bill, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Curran, Ms Margaret, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Eadie, Helen, Fergusson, Alex, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Gallie, Phil, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Gorrie, Donald, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Harding, Mr Keith, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Jenkins, Ian, Johnstone, Alex, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Lyon, George, Macdonald, Lewis, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, MacKay, Angus, MacLean, Kate, Macmillan, Maureen, Martin, Paul, McAllion, Mr John, McAveety, Mr Frank, McCabe, Mr Tom, McConnell, Mr Jack, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay, McLetchie, David, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Monteith, Mr Brian, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Mundell, David, Munro, John Farquhar, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Radcliffe, Nora, Raffan, Mr Keith, Robson, Euan, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Scott, Tavish, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Mrs Margaret, Stone, Mr Jamie, Thomson, Elaine, Tosh, Mr Murray, Wallace, Ben, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 34, Against 83, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 144 disagreed to.