Official Report 189KB pdf
The next item is the discussion of proposals for the launch of public guidance on petitions. We thought that the next meeting, on 16 November, would provide an ideal platform for the launch of the public guidance material. However, the clerk has suggested that that is a bit optimistic, as the document that we hope to launch has not been finalised and agreed by the committee. Further design work will have to be carried out on it.
I was going to suggest St. Andrew's day.
I think that we are on holiday on that day.
A people's day. Are we having it as a public holiday, at long last?
I do not know; I cannot remember.
Do we have a public petition about that, John?
Parliament is closed on 30 November.
That is a pity.
We could still have the launch on that day.
That gives me the opportunity to congratulate you on the press release that was sent out. It was picked up by the local media in my area and they used it to ask questions about the work of the Public Petitions Committee. I did a short radio broadcast on that, which was very useful. I presume that you sent out a press release.
No, I was asked to comment; I did not send out a press release.
I was going to comment, but I did not.
I would not send out a press release without the authority of the committee.
Schools?
Schools as well, if necessary. The guidance note will also be placed on the Parliament's website, and will include an interactive forum for those who want to submit petitions by e-mail.
BT had a dummy public petition that I saw somewhere—perhaps at a party conference. People were interested in it. We are a little behind the times. I do not blame anyone for this, but many people have asked me how to submit petitions and I keep saying that we will produce something—so we must. I would ask that it be colourful. The Parliament spends a fortune on glossy presentation—I know that I am making a political point—but we should have something colourful that does not look too utilitarian. The document should give little examples and be exciting, with the web address on it and so on. Will we be able to look at a draft before it goes out?
Yes. That is the idea—that a draft will come back to the committee and that no documents will go out until the committee has approved them. We will do that at the next meeting on 16 November. The idea of the flyer is to make the information more colourful and user-friendly. The parliamentary information fact sheet will be a more serious document. The flyer is intended to grab and excite public attention.
There is a Justice and Home Affairs Committee meeting on 23 November.
All day?
It is usually in the morning—sometimes it is in the afternoon.
So Tuesday mornings are out?
Yes.
I understand that committee meetings are timetabled round the committees that we are all on, so if there is no petitions meeting, I will be at justice.
The launch will have to be on a Tuesday afternoon, because that is when the Public Petitions Committee tends to meet.
Could not the launch take place directly after the Tuesday afternoon meeting?
We cannot do it on 16 November because we have not agreed the papers, and the next meeting is not until 14 December. I suggest a Tuesday afternoon between those two dates, which would be either 23 November or 7 December.
Sooner rather than later, I think.
People will be into Christmas stuff by then.
On 23 November—Tuesday afternoon?
Yes. The same time that we come here, I would think.
Just for a launch?
Yes. We will not necessarily have access to this committee room, but the launch could be held outwith the Parliament if necessary, to try to attract the press.
It could held in the Parliament chamber.
We can discuss that at our meeting on 16 November. Do we agree on that date?
The other item that we have to agree is the document on the proper form of public petitions. Steve will introduce the document.
At a previous meeting, the committee discussed the fact that the standing orders require the committee to decide the proper form of petitions and that any petition that did not conform to the proper designation would be ruled inadmissible. The committee felt that that might be restrictive and not in keeping with its aims. The clerks agreed to prepare the paper that is now before the committee. The paper simplifies the criteria for the proper form of petitions to the following: petitions must be typewritten on A4 paper and signed by the petitioner. Those criteria would make admissible the majority of petitions that are properly presented and are in a form that can be easily understood by members.
I repeat: the criteria for public petitions are that petitions must be typewritten in blue or black ink and signed by the petitioner.
I have two points. First, a petitioner who is partially sighted or has sight difficulties should be able to nominate someone else to submit his or her petition. I do not see why we cannot accept petitions in Braille.
The standing orders require that petitions must be in English.
Yes, but that should be made clear in the paper. Will that document form the basis of guidelines for the proper form of petitions?
The document will be in addition to the standing orders, which cover the point that petitions must be in English.
But people do not read the standing orders.
We could include the suggestion that we would be happy to make special arrangements for partially sighted people and people with other difficulties.
That would be appropriate. Will the document form the guideline sheet for the proper form of public petitions?
The paper will be added to the existing public guidance.
Okay. It is just that people are frightened by standing orders and do not read them.
The public guidance will contain all relevant information and will be easy to follow.
We should make it clear that people can submit petitions in Braille. There should be no barrier in that respect.
I welcome the fact that we are making it as easy as possible for people to access the committee; I thank the clerks for their work.
Why cannot handwritten petitions be submitted?
Some of the handwritten petitions that we have received have caused committee members and clerks real difficulties. We have to establish a form that makes petitions easy to understand and to follow.
Even in this day and age, some people still do not have access to typewriters.
The danger is that if we cannot understand the petition, the petitioner's case might not be put across in the best way.
Perhaps that can be included in the paper.
We could certainly give reasons for not accepting handwritten petitions.
We could say that petitions must be typewritten as handwritten documents present certain difficulties for the committee.
I thought that any typewritten or printed petitions would be in addition to handwritten ones.
I agree that there should be as little guidance as possible so that we are not restrictive. However, some of the petitions that we have seen have not been legible. Although there should not be too many rules on the proper form of petitions, we must ask people to make an effort—I would err on the side of caution on handwritten ones.
That is to be included in the general guidance. We will ask for signatures, dates and addresses. With those amendments, is that agreed?
That paper will be brought back in full form to the next meeting of the committee, on 16 November.
Previous
ProgressNext
Convener's Report