PE545 is from Miss M McDonald on behalf of the Glasgow campaign against housing stock transfer and PE553 is from Mr John Carracher on behalf of the Scottish tenants a real choice campaign. Both petitions relate to housing stock transfer. The Executive considers the housing stock transfer ballot in Glasgow to be valid and is content that it was conducted in line with all statutory requirements. It would, of course, be open to the petitioners to challenge the validity of the ballot in the courts. That is an option that they have considered but have not yet pursued. The Executive is also content that the procedures that are in place for the organisation and running of such ballots are in order, as is the mechanism for the funding of stock transfer programmes. The Executive is also clearly not in favour of exploring any alternative method of writing off housing debt in Glasgow, although it makes it clear that councils have alternative options available to them for improving their housing stock. In addition, it would seem extremely unlikely that the Social Justice Committee would see any merit in examining the issues raised in the petition, given that it has already conducted a major inquiry following which it endorsed the principle of stock transfer. On that basis, it is suggested that the committee could agree to take no further action in relation to PE545 and PE553, other than to pass a copy of the Executive response to both petitioners and to the clerk to the Social Justice Committee for information only. Do members have views on that?
Official Report · Committee
Current Petitions
Housing Stock Transfer (Glasgow) (PE545 and PE553)
Speakers
Choose an MSP to read only their contributions- Helen Eadie Lab 4
- Dorothy-Grace Elder Ind 3
- Dr Winnie Ewing SNP 2
The record
9 contributionsI have a question about the suggested action. On what ground could the petitioners challenge the validity of the ballot? Is it a question of a majority or a minority?
The ballot gave no alternative. It did not propose a council deal as an alternative to the stock transfer, which would have given the voters a choice.
The clerk advises me that it had to do with the title of the organisation as shown on the ballot.
So there was a question of validity.
The word "Limited" was not included. That implied that the Glasgow Housing Association was a normal housing association.
Do members agree to the course of action proposed?
I am sorry to be a nark, but I wonder whether we should pass the petitions to the Justice 2 Committee. The Social Justice Committee might take a rather different view to that of the Justice 2 Committee. The petitions touch on questions of public accountability and of treating the public fairly. The date of the housing stock transfer has changed three or four times. There are real problems with it and there is real discontent in Glasgow over how the matter has been handled and over how things will go in future. I wonder whether the Justice 2 Committee might be minded to have a look at the petitions.
The petitions are about the ballot itself. PE545 points out that the Glasgow Housing Association was fined £100 by the Financial Services Authority for not using its full registered title in adverts and letters, but there was no evidence to suggest that there had been a deliberate attempt to mislead tenants. As the issue is over the ballot itself, we have no option but to agree to the course of action that is set out in our papers. If members are agreeable to that, we will move on.Members indicated agreement.
In this meeting
Everything on 17 Dec 2002 →- Scottish Parliament Public Petitions Committee Tuesday 17 December 2002 (Morning) Petitions · 1
- Item in Private Procedure · 1
- Current Petitions Petitions · 10
- Current Petitions Petitions · 2
- Current Petitions Petitions · 1
- Current Petitions Petitions · 7
- Current Petitions Petitions · 9
- Current Petitions Petitions · 10
- New Petitions Petitions · 50
- New Petitions Petitions · 61
- New Petitions Petitions · 52
- New Petitions Petitions · 65
- New Petitions Petitions · 32
- New Petitions Petitions · 21
- Inadmissible Petition Petitions · 5
- Convener's Report Procedure · 2
The type of each item (debate, statement, questions, members’ business and so on) and the times shown are worked out by this site from headings, the chair’s opening words and the Official Report’s running timestamps. They are not the Parliament’s own classification. Text: the Scottish Parliament Official Report.