To be fair, in the evidence that we have got, there is a clear indication that the model that is used in England will not be adopted in Scotland. Everyone has said that they will not do that. In order to effect that level of change, we would need to see people in the political process making that a manifesto commitment and winning the political case for change. That does not seem to be the case. In what we have established, there seems to be no sense that people would want to move to that model.
My feeling is that the fundamental questions are about the definition of “the public interest” and the fact that the decision is made elsewhere, which means that the families do not feel that they are fully engaged with that decision.
We probably need to close the petition, but we should recognise that those are huge issues for families and that people need to think about how families are supported. On the other hand, as the evidence shows, if families have the wrong notion or misunderstand their rights—I would not go so far as to say that they are misled—that can be very difficult. They might think that they should be able to get an FAI, but in fact there are strict rules around that.
It is one of those petitions in respect of which we would not be fair to the petitioner if we suggested that there was something else that we could do, and we would be misrepresenting our position if we held on to the petition, given that there is really nothing within our powers that could change the position.
Do we agree to close the petition, but with all the caveats that I have mentioned, on the basis that the submissions that we have received clearly show that there is no support for the action that the petitioner has requested?
Members indicated agreement.