The next item of business is a statement by Angela Constance on update on ministerial working group on building and fire safety. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions, and I call on Angela Constance up to 10 minutes, please, cabinet secretary. I would like to provide Parliament with an update on the work of the ministerial working group on building and fire safety. I am sure that I speak for everyone in this chamber when I say that our thoughts and deepest sympathy remain with all those affected by the tragic events at Grenfell Tower. Since those events in June, we have taken steps to strengthen building regulations and fire safety in Scotland. The ministerial working group has been focused on three key areas, reassuring the public of the steps that we have taken to ensure such a tragedy will not happen in Scotland, establishing the fire safety of high-rise domestic buildings and improving the fire safety and compliance of building standards. Following the Grenfell fire, reassuring the public that our high-rise buildings are safe from fire was absolutely paramount. I want to record my thanks and highlight the immense work undertaken by the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service in this endeavour. The service has distributed over 60,000 comprehensive fire safety leaflets, carried out around 890 operational assurance visits to high-rise domestic properties and over 1,200 individual home fire safety visits. Those activities gave the public visible and tangible reassurance at a time when the tragic events at Grenfell were understandably causing great anxiety. The ministerial group also asked the fire service to extend and refresh their multi-storey fire safety campaign, which launched on 8 October. That gives information and advice on what to do if there is a fire in a high-rise building. The campaign promotes fire safety advice about living in high-rise buildings and will run for the remainder of this year. Following the tragic events at Grenfell, it became clear that the aluminium composite material, ACM, used on the tower's cladding system, contributed to the rapid spread of fire. The specific product was first certified for use in 2008 and became the focus for checks across the UK. In Scotland, applications for building warrants for high-rise domestic buildings and building regulations enforced from May 2005 do not permit use of the same type of ACM as that found on Grenfell Tower. The ministerial group nonetheless sought to verify whether there were any high-rise domestic builds in Scotland completely clad in the same type of ACM. I want to be clear about ACM. The presence of ACM itself does not necessarily mean that a building is defective or dangerous. As the UK Government's full-scale fire tests have demonstrated, some grades of ACM used with the right insulation can mean that an overall cladding system is fire-resistant enough to be used on high-rise buildings. It is the type of ACM and the extent of its use that is key in determining fire risk. For those reasons, the ministerial group took a risk-based approach that focused on establishing the presence of ACM cladding on domestic buildings over 18 metres, as well as non-domestic buildings where people might sleep, such as hospitals and care homes, and schools were also prioritised. The nature and scale of the work is resource-intensive, and I want to express my gratitude to local authorities and others for their responsiveness to our requests, which helped to establish the extent of the use of ACM. 31 local authorities reported that no public or private domestic high-rise was completely clad in ACM. As members know, Glasgow City Council reported that ACM had been found on private high-rise buildings, which were granted building warrants before 2005. Two of those have extensive ACM. The council is working closely with owners to ensure that fire safety measures are upgraded and a long-term solution is agreed. Our request for information from local authorities showed that having a clear nationwide picture of a high-rise building stock would be helpful to inform our future work. The group has therefore commissioned a comprehensive inventory of domestic high-rise buildings over 18 metres, which will include construction-type and fire safety features. The work is expected to be complete by spring 2018, and we will then consider how it can be maintained in the future. The ministerial group is determined to do all that it can to ensure that the fire safety and building standards expected in the buildings that we live in are as strong and effective as they can be. I want to outline to the chamber the other steps that we have taken. Building regulations relating to the fire safety of cladden systems were strengthened in 2005 to ensure that cladden on domestic high-rise buildings must be non-combustible and meet the most stringent fire test at the time. We are not complacent further to our original request for and receipt of information on all high-rise buildings over 18 metres. The group has decided to seek additional reassurance from local authorities with respect to pre-2005 high-rise domestic properties and non-domestic high-rise buildings with sleeping accommodation. We are doing so to ensure that we have captured information on all relevant building types and that nothing has been missed. In addition, the ministerial working group has commissioned three reviews. The first is a review of building standards relating to fire safety to ensure that our regulations are robust and clear. The review chaired by Dr Paul Stollard is already under way. Its scope covers high-rise domestic buildings, including student accommodation and high-rise non-domestic buildings with sleeping accommodation, such as hotels and hospitals. It will focus on standards that cover fire spread on external walls, cavities, spread to and from neighbouring buildings, and escape and automatic fire suppression systems. The review will drop on the expertise of fire and building design specialists from academia and industry and will look beyond Scotland to learn from international best practice. Recommendations for improvement will be shared with a global group of experienced building fire safety regulators from the USA, Australia, Netherlands and Austria, ensuring that any required changes reflect the latest expertise from across the world. The second is a review of enforcement and compliance of building standards. Earlier this year, Scottish ministers gave an undertaking that they will consider the findings of the independent inquiry into the construction of Edinburgh schools. This comprehensive review chaired by Professor John Goal will examine the roles and responsibilities of everyone involved in all elements of construction from start to finish. It will consider the actions needed before a building warrant is granted and a completion certificate is accepted. It will consider the risk-based approach to reasonable inquiry by local authority verifiers before they accept a completion certificate and the role of certification in the construction journey. Additionally, the review will reflect on any issues identified with wind calculation and installation of external wall installation, which may require further action. Chairs of such high calibre are leading these reviews alongside the wealth of experience on each of the review groups that demonstrates the support that we have to get this right. The recommendations of those reviews will lead to a consultation starting next spring. The third is a review of Scotland's fire safety regime for high-rise domestic properties to ensure that it is fit for purpose and provides comprehensive protection for residents. The review will be led by the Scottish Government and begin this month. It will identify changes that are required in legislation or practice, including whether the roles and responsibilities of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service should be expanded. Together, the three reviews will ensure that we improve our practices and have robust regulations in building standards and fire safety. The ministerial working group has also developed a comprehensive strategic plan of activity that includes consulting on consolidated and strengthened fire safety guidance for buildings where people sleep and on a minimum safe standard for fire and smoke alarms in Scottish homes. Our work also involves close involvement with the on-going UK review of building standards, ensuring that any key lessons are applied here in Scotland. I hope that the overview of the current work of the ministerial working group can reassure Parliament that the Scottish Government is committed to ensuring that lessons are learned and action taken to make our buildings safe. As part of that, we will continue to keep a watching brief on the UK Grenfell Public Inquiry ready to respond to any new evidence that comes to light. The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues raised in her statement, for which I intend to allow around 20 minutes. It would be helpful if members who wish to ask a question could press the request-to-speak buttons and bear in mind that, only if everyone is quite short with questions and answers, will all members who wish to get to ask the question. I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement. We welcome the fact that there will be reviews into building standards, enforcement and compliance of those standards and the fire safety regime. The local government and communities committee has already looked at those areas and come up with comprehensive recommendations that would improve building regulation and standards. The reviews announced today duplicate work that has already been done. First, can the cabinet secretary confirm if she is minded to accept any of the committee's recommendations? Secondly, the cabinet secretary mentioned cladding in her statement. She told this Parliament on September 21 that the Government was informed on September 5 that some flats in Glasgow might have ACM cladding, but we have email evidence that suggests that the Government knew three weeks earlier than that. Can Angela Constance confirm exactly when Government officials and ministers were told about that cladding? I thank Mr Simpson for his question and, indeed, his welcome of the various reviews and work that the ministerial working group has either commenced or, indeed, is taking forward. I would dispute that our work duplicates the local government committee review. It is fair to say that there will at times be overlaps. We very much welcome the diligent hard work that is undertaken by the committee and we will be given a full-sum response to the committee's work in due course. Of course, there is a debate on the committee's work in the very near future. Without preempting any of that, I am quite sure that we will, indeed, be mindful and accepting of some of the recommendations that are made by the committee. We will, of course, have to give all matters careful consideration and it would be wrong of me to preempt our close scrutiny of the committee's work here in the few minutes that I have. In terms of cladding, he raises issues about verification. We have been transparent about the work that we are leading in the ministerial working group. We are always happy to provide further detail. It is important to stress that, over the past few months, we have received and do receive information from concerned people, whether that is building owners or local authorities, and we have, on results of those information, had to dig deeper to clarify at times what that information is saying. I do not accept Mr Simpson's characterisation of how he has presented the facts around Glasgow. As I have said previously, there has been intensive engagement between officials and Glasgow City Council officials to clarify what the issues are and the nature of those issues and to get specific information. It is imperative that, when we come to our feet with information, that that information is accurate. Does the minister agree that it is the Scottish Government's duty to give confidence to the public that all our buildings will be or will achieve the correct standard of fire safety, regardless of being in the public or the private sector, so that all residents and tenants have equal protection? Is the minister fully aware that some ACM cladding is present in both towers in Glasgow harbour and that that was signed off in 2005-2006? Therefore, I hope that she would agree that that would warrant some questions in itself. Does the minister think that it is fair, therefore, that those residents in Glasgow harbour have been charged for the use of fire warden patrols? Surely residents should not pay the price of this poor decision. Finally, I thank the working group for all the work that they have done so far, but would you consider the inclusion of the fire brigade union on the expert working group as an added voice to the table of experts? Angela Constance I thank Pauline McNeill for her question. The Government does indeed have a duty to ensure that we have the very best of standards and that those standards are put into practice. There are many issues that the Parliament is aware of in terms of the buildings that she sites in Glasgow and in terms of the Edinburgh schools inquiry that has raised a number of very detailed questions about building standards and regulations stating one thing, and perhaps other things happening in practice. That is why we have taken the move not just in response to Grenfell but also in terms of the Edinburgh schools inquiry to commission a review into enforcement and compliance. It is important to stress that others, other than Government, not to do more from Government's responsibilities, but others, whether that is local government or indeed building owners or the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, also have very clear roles and responsibilities. Part of the work in relation to the fire-related building standards and the regulatory framework in the high-rise domestic buildings and the broader work about enforcement and compliance is to ensure that everybody has the correct roles and responsibilities going forward. With regard to the point about the FBU, it is an internal ministerial working group that I chair that I am ably assisted by Ms Ewing and Mr Stewart. It is an internal ministerial working group that we are working very hard to be informative, to be transparent and to be helpful in enabling people to be informed and to access the work that we are doing. We are outward looking. As ministers, we are always happy to engage separately with the FBU, industry experts or anyone who has an interest to engage and help us on this important journey that we are on. On the Glasgow situation, I accept that residents and building owners are finding themselves in a very difficult situation, not of their making. It is, of course, not the norm for Government to provide financial assistance of the nature that Ms McNeill is touching on direct to homeowners. It is important that Glasgow City Council, in its work with the factors and the residents, comes to a clear understanding quickly in the vast city building to do some work in and around that to help to scope out what work is required in terms of a longer-term solution that will obviously give a view about overall costs. It is important and imperative in terms of dealing with the situation here and now that interim safety measures were put in place to keep residents safe in their homes. I know that you want to be very, very thorough on such an important subject. You can maybe have a short answer, please. I allow everyone to get in. Questioners bear that in mind, too, for questions. Clare Adamson, followed by Alexander Stewart. I thank the cabinet secretary for his statement and welcome the three review streams that are detailed in it. Can I seek assurance that the Scottish Government will be able to respond timisly and effectively to any matters that may yet arise as a consequence of either of its review streams or from the public inquiry into Grenfell Tower? Angela Constance. Yes, Presiding Officer, that is the short answer to that. We established the ministerial working group very quickly after the tragic events at Grenfell. It is met for seven times. We are working hard to engage with colleagues in the UK Government and devolved administrations. We are keeping a close eye on the Dame Judith Hackett review of building standards south of the border and, indeed, Mr Stewart and I have engaged with Judith Hackett on that. We will continue to monitor the public inquiry around Grenfell. The remit of the working group is, of course, to deal with any other matters as our pertinent and desired. Alexander Stewart, followed by Bob Doris. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I note from the statement that you wish to seek additional reassurances from local authorities with respect to pre-2005 high-rise domestic properties and non-domestic high-rise buildings with sleeping accommodation. Can I ask the cabinet secretary what measures are being taken to achieve those reassurances and what they are? Angela Constance. Again, thank you, Mr Stewart, for that question. In essence, we want to go back to local authorities. We are currently in the midst of drafting correspondence. We want to take a belt and braces approach. We want to dig deep. We are conscious that this is a somewhat complex area. I am conscious that buildings that were built to be, for example, student accommodation are perhaps now occupied as more traditional residential homes. I want to be assured, and I am sure that the chamber wants to be assured, that we are capturing all the necessary relevant information. In terms of our risk-based approach, it is entirely appropriate that we also take a look at high-rise flats that are not considered domestic but where people sleep in at night. We will keep Mr Stewart and others informed about the nature of those inquiries and the detail of the requests that we make to our partners in local government. Bob Doris, followed by David Stewart. Presiding Officer, the local government committee has indeed had an inquiry into this area and hopefully the Scottish Government will be in a position to respond formally to that report ahead of next week's debate. However, one conclusion within our required report was that there should be a national high-rise inventory with the gas fire safety that should be regularly updated, that it should be speedily accessible and that it potentially should carry additional information. Can I ask the cabinet secretary, given that the Scottish Government is now seeking additional information and reassurances from councils? Does that not strengthen that the Scottish Government should accept that very specific recommendation? If I could say to Mr Doris that it is certainly making the prospects of that specific recommendation that the committee makes being accepted and endorsed by the Government, as I said, I do not think that it is appropriate prior to the debate or Mr Stewart's formal response to the committee for me to be speaking too much about that, given that the focus here today is on the work of the ministerial working group. However, the important point is that the building inventory will give us that overview of the types of domestic high-rise buildings, their construction, the existing fire safety measures and to understand how improvements could be made. That includes issues around retrofit sprinklers. I have heard Mr Doris speak about this point before about how, once we gather information, we keep that information up-to-date and relevant and pertinent. The cabinet secretary will be well aware that, in Scotland, there has been no multi-fire deaths where working sprinklers have been in operation. Will the Stollard review address the issue of retrofitting of sprinklers in high-rise domestic properties? Thanks again to Mr Stewart. We are watching his proposals around his plans for a member's bill very closely, and I have had the opportunity to meet Mr Stewart and discuss those matters. As I said in my earlier reply with respect to the work that we are doing around the inventory on high-rise buildings, that will give us a clear picture of the condition of those buildings and what is physically and technically possible within those buildings. I know that Mr Stewart has a very keen interest in that area, but it is not just her work around the inventory that will also be helpful in our future decisions and future works. The work in relation to the fire-related building standards is important in that regard.  There is also joint research by Bri and the Fire Industry Association that was commissioned by the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service that we will be looking at in due course as well. Andy Wightman, followed by Sandra White. I thank the cabinet secretary for advancing the copy of her statement. On 27 September 2017, the minister, Kevin Stewart, at the local government committees committee told us that the remits of the Stollards and John Cole review had not yet been agreed. I am not aware if they have been published yet. Can the cabinet secretary confirm whether they have been published and if not, when they will be? Angela Constance. I will attend to that matter imminently if it has not been addressed. We want to share that information with the committee and all members who have an interest. We will give an undertaking to do that as soon as possible. Sandra White, followed by Liam McArthur. Very much, Presiding Officer. The two buildings that were mentioned before in Glasgow are indeed in the Glasgow Harbour site in my constituency. Indeed, ever since received from constituents state completion certificates were received after May 2005. Therefore, what evidence the working group has received from Glasgow City Council that they are doing everything in their power to enable residents to be kept informed of everything that is going on and the on-going work, and I told them that they can access further advice. Angela Constance. The issue in and around completion certificates is one of the many issues that the review on building standards in terms of compliance and enforcement will, of course, be looking at in further details. In terms of the work that is on-going at a local level, Glasgow City Council has been keeping the ministerial working group updated on a regular basis. They remain proactive on addressing the situation with the two towers that Ms White refers to. I know that the council has written to property owners detailing the actions that they have taken to date. That includes the interim measures to improve fire safety of the buildings, as I mentioned earlier, to allow residents to continue to be living at home, and there is the work that will need to be done to remove and replace the cladden. If that does not capture everything that the constituency member requires, we will endeavour to write to her in the fullest detail. Liam McArthur, followed by Maurice Corry. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I thank the cabinet secretary for early sight of her statement and, indeed, the details of the three reviews. Given the on-going review taking place within the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service and the services that exist will publicise resource pressures, can the cabinet secretary give the chamber any indication of what expanded roles and responsibilities are being considered for the service as part of the review of fire safety regime? Can she also issue a Parliament that any expanded roles will be properly funded? Angela Constance. I do not want to pre-empt the work where international experts are paying very close attention to all those matters. Members will be aware that there is a difference in fire safety legislation in Scotland, as it is in England. That sparked off a bit of a debate around the expansion or not of particular roles and responsibilities. When making decisions, we have to be fully cognisant of the resource implications of any such decisions. I should also remind members that this year's operational budget has increased with the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service by more than £21 million. It is also important to stress that the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service has really stepped up to the plate. Since Grenfell, it has undertaken more than 1,200 home visits. Nearly 500 home visits have been in Glasgow, and it has undertaken nearly 900 operational and intelligence visits again to assure themselves that they know the layout of buildings and to be the visible reassurance to residents. Maurice Corry, followed by John Mason. Can the cabinet secretary confirm what will be the full extent and remit of the scope of the review for the high-rise domestic properties? Angela Constance. I am not sure that I understand which specific review Mr Corry is referring to. As I said earlier, we have three reviews on going on the building standards review around compliance and enforcement and the building standards review on fire-related safety standards. As I said to Mr Switeman, we will ensure that that remit is published. There is also a look at the regulatory framework that is far more about the day-to-day operations of domestic high-rise buildings. We have taken a broad definition of what a high-rise building is, including over two stories, because we want to be able to capture the tenements, for example. We have taken a broad brush approach to ensure that we capture different types of buildings. We would understand the common sense to be high-rise buildings that are perhaps not 18 metres or above. The review of the regulatory framework is also important in the work that we will do around the roles and responsibilities of the Scottish fire sector and other major players in fire safety. John Mason. Concerning the comprehensive inventory of domestic high-rise buildings, which the cabinet secretary referred to in her statement, can she clarify that that is just a malg pulling together figures that councils already have, or is somebody else going out to Glasgow and Edinburgh and elsewhere and doing an assessment from scratch? What we are actually doing, Mr Mason, is that we have procured the work for the inventory, so people will be able to tender for that work. We hope that that work will be completed by next spring. That, if you like, will be a fresh pair of eyes in terms of the condition of domestic high-rise buildings in Scotland. In that regard, again, it is about cross-checking information and ensuring of no gaps. We have detailed knowledge of the conditions in and around fire safety and other matters for domestic high-rise buildings in Scotland. If there is to be an expansion of the roles and responsibilities of the fire and rescue services, how will those be fulfilled on a reduced budget and with fewer personnel? I answered that question earlier. If we deal with the operational budget of the Scottish fire and rescue service this year, it has actually increased. We are not prejudging any of the outcomes of the reviews that are led by eminent international experts. There may or may not be an expansion of roles, but we will, indeed, be keeping members fully informed of all deliberations that will be taken in the interests of building safety and the residents of Scotland. That concludes questions on the cabinet secretary's statement. I'll give a couple of moments and we'll move on to the next side of my business.