RURAL AFFAIRS AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE Rural housing inquiry Supplementary evidence from Rural Housing Service Thank you for your letter of the 1st May regarding our evidence to the Rural Affairs and Environment Committee Inquiry into Rural Housing. I write to clarify the questions raised in your letter. Government Subsidy Despite the greater costs of building in rural areas, government subsidy to rural housing providers is lower per house in rural areas than urban areas; £142 M will produce 2375 houses (£59,789 each) in rural areas whilst in urban areas £320.51 will produce 4991 houses (£64,215 each). The development of rural housing costs more for a number of reasons including the lack of economies of scale, transport costs, and contractor subsistence costs. However despite this, the average government subsidy per house is lower in rural areas. This is because a greater amount of the houses built are low cost home ownership units. An increased level of LCHO such as shared equity will bring in additional private money (through mortgages) to help pay for the unit therefore the amount of government subsidy required is lower. Pressured Area Status In our evidence we highlight one local authority reluctant to impose pressured area status as they thought the move would cause a rush to buy from tenants confused about the restrictions this places on them – this has not been the case in other local authority areas. We have been told that another local authority is reluctant to impose pressured area status as this might affect right to buy receipts (mainly coming from rural areas) which are needed to spend on housing in more urban parts of the authority. In other local authorities to political impact of rural areas will be small as will be the housing stock, therefore the pressure to spend time working to apply for pressured area status will be low. Some local authorities have indicated that they do not have the staff resources to produce the amount of information required by the legislation or to conduct the consultative process required. Areas we believe would merit pressured area status include Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park, East Lothian, Arran and Argyll Infrastructure My understanding is that Scottish Water is in a better place all round and that this is down to the fact that they are in a different funding era and are now funded for 1 growth. They have unblocked a lot of the problems that previously existed The issue with SEPA is really to do with what are known as CAR licences which is where Scottish Water has to apply for permission to extract water from source. This process can take quite a long time, but is dependent on how close housing authorities work with SEPA and Scottish Water in different areas. In Highland Council area the system of local development forums provide good opportunities for discussion between the different agencies. Right to Buy We have asked local authorities to provide information on right to buy sales in small localities. Some have not been able to respond within the timescale and some do not have the information at small settlement level. We have however collated responses from Argyll & Bute Council, East Lothian Council, Highland Council, and Scottish Borders Council. From these four councils there are 28 communities where all the local authority housing has been sold through Right to Buy. These are: East Lothian: Millknowe, East Barns, Whittinghame; Scottish Borders: Carlops, Chesters, Eckford, Fogo, Lamberton, Lanton, Lindean, Midlem, Minto, Nisbet, Roxburgh; Highland: Moniak, Glenborrodale, Glenfinnan, Kinlochewe, Argyll & Bute: Strathlachlan, Laphroaig, Lagavulin, Bridge of Orchy, Port Appin. Portnacroish, Pennyghael, Kilberry, Lochgair, Kingarth. Attached is a list of all communities within these 4 areas where more than 75% of housing stock has been lost through RTB. Please let me know if you require any further information. 75-100% RTB sale losses in rural communities Percentage Locality RTB Sales Current Stock Total Loss East Lothian (2008) New Winton 12 4 16 75.0 Kingston 5 1 6 83 Millknowe 2 0 2 100 East Barns 4 0 4 100 Whittinghame 4 0 4 100 2 Scottish Borders (2007) Newmill 3 1 4 75.0 Traquair 3 1 4 75 Birgham 10 3 13 76.9 Sprouston 10 3 13 76.9 Ashkirk 4 1 5 80.0 Darnick 8 2 10 80.0 Heriot 12 2 14 85.7 Foulden 13 1 14 92.9 Oxton 13 1 14 92.9 Carlops 1 0 1 100.0 Chesters 3 0 3 100.0 Eckford 2 0 2 100.0 Fogo 1 0 1 100.0 Lamberton 1 0 1 100.0 Lanton 1 0 1 100.0 Lindean 3 0 3 100.0 Midlem 4 0 4 100.0 Minto 1 0 1 100.0 Nisbet 1 0 1 100.0 Roxburgh 4 0 4 100.0 Highland Council % of all HC (2004) stock Boat of Garten 42 12 54 77.8 Balnain 6 1 7 85.7 Dores 22 4 26 84.6 Moniak 1 0 1 100 Camusnagaul 10 2 12 83.3 Glenborrodale 1 0 1 100 Glenfinnan 3 0 3 100.0 Morar 19 6 25 76 Ardross 6 2 8 75 Kilcoy 22 1 23 95.7 Kinlochewe 7 0 7 100.0 Kilvaxter 3 1 4 75 3 Argyll & Bute (2008) RTB Current Stock Total % sold Benmore 6 2 8 75% Strathlachlan 1 0 1 100% Colintraive 16 7 23 70% Ardbeg 3 1 4 75% Lagavullin 4 0 4 100% Laphroig 2 0 2 100% Jura 24 8 32 75% Appin 26 7 33 78% Bridge of Orchy 4 0 4 100% Connel 25 6 31 81% Kilmelford 8 2 10 80% Kilmore 5 1 6 83% Lochawe 9 3 12 75% Lismore 9 1 10 90% Port Appin 5 0 5 100% Portnacroish 1 0 1 100% Barcaldine 8 3 11 73% Fionnphort 9 2 11 82% Pennyghael 1 0 1 100% Luss 19 5 24 79% Bellochantuy 3 1 4 75% Gigha 9 3 12 75% Penninver 14 2 16 88% Cairnbaan 21 5 26 81% Kilberry 3 0 3 100% Kilmartin 9 1 10 90% Lochgair 6 0 6 100% Tayvallich 10 2 12 83% Cnoc-an-rear 7 1 8 88% Kilchattan Bay 3 1 4 75% Kingarth 4 0 4 100% Rural Housing Service 13 June 2008 4 .