Official Report 218KB pdf
Trust Law (PE817)
The first of our current petitions is PE817 by Elaine Black and Ewan Kennedy, which calls on the Scottish Parliament to reform the law of trust to ensure that, where a trust has been set up for the benefit of a community, that community will be formally consulted by any party who seeks to change the operation of the trust, and that the view of each member of that community will be accountably considered before any change is made.
I have had a quick informal discussion with my colleague, Pauline McNeill, who apologises for not attending today's meeting. She has a considerable interest in the petition. Members have copies of a helpful response that was sent to Pauline by Colin Boyd, the Lord Advocate. I suggest that, in addition to contacting the Executive to gain its views on the responses from the petitioners, we should also contact the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator—which takes over supervision and regulation of Scottish charities from April—in order to acquaint it with the terms of the petition and to see whether it has any advice to offer.
That sounds like a good suggestion.
That would be worth while. The key point in the petition is that it should be made easier for persons who already have rights to enforce those rights. That is a reasonable request, in my view, so if a way can be found to ensure that people can enforce their rights without recourse to heavy-duty courts, that way should be found.
Do members agree to follow Jackie Baillie's recommendation?
National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000 (PE805)
The next petition is PE805, by Ian Watson and Peter Brucelow, which calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Executive to review the National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000 and, in particular, the performance of each national park authority in meeting the four aims of a national park as defined in the act.
On rereading the papers, I find that there are two separate issues. First, there is the fact that the park authority for the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs national park is introducing a series of byelaws, some of which have support and some of which do not. However, the Scottish Executive has recently started a formal consultation process on the byelaws, which will last for 12 weeks; I encourage both petitioners to respond to that consultation. I think the Environment and Rural Development Committee will be the lead committee, so there could be an opportunity for it to scrutinise the proposals.
That is a reasonable suggestion. We could write to the petitioners to ensure that they are aware that they can contribute to the consultation. I agree that because the parks are barely up and running, it might be too early to scrutinise their performance—although that should be done at some point. Do members agree?
Local Democracy (PE880)
Petition PE880 was lodged by Iain D Skene on behalf of the Renfrewshire and Inverclyde association of Burns clubs. It calls on the Scottish Parliament to consider and debate the democratic accountability of local authorities and, in particular, the accessibility of local elected representatives.
At this stage, we should seek the petitioner's views. We usually extend that courtesy.
We will write back to the petitioner to seek his views on the responses.
I appreciate that the council has provided robust and comprehensive answers, but we should still write to the petitioner.
Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) (PE885)
Petition PE885 requests the Scottish Parliament to amend the Scots criminal law on sex offences so that there is a statutory offence of male rape. That would bring the law in Scotland into line with the legal position in the rest of the United Kingdom and Ireland. The petition also wants the law to be changed to ensure that no offences may be committed exclusively by gay men and that all sex offences apply equally to everyone, whether man or woman, gay or straight.
Do we want to do what we did with the previous petition and consult the petitioner about the responses that we have received, which are quite lengthy?
That is a fair suggestion. The letter from the Scottish Law Commission is particularly helpful and I welcome it. I had not picked up on the fact that the petitioner has not been invited to respond. That being the case, I agree with Helen Eadie's suggestion.
Okay. We will write to the petitioner.
New Towns (PE887)
Petition PE887, which was submitted by the Rev Neil MacKinnon, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Executive to review the long-term planning, social, economic and transportation issues surrounding the creation of new towns such as Cumbernauld.
Yes.
That seems to be our agreed way of proceeding.
Secondary Schools (Lockers) (PE825)
Petition PE825, which was submitted by Alana Watson on behalf of Rosshall academy students council and higher modern studies section, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Executive to ensure that every Scottish secondary school provides lockers for pupils so that they do not have to carry heavy bags throughout the school day, which could cause back problems.
Perhaps we could seek the view of the Minister for Education and Young People on the response that we have had from the petitioners. It is encouraging that there are young people who are willing to be tenacious.
Yes, that is encouraging.
Have we not already had a response from the minister?
Yes, but we wrote back to the petitioners and they have responded with further points. The suggestion has been made that we should put those points to the minister.
Glasgow City Council has no policy on the provision of pupil lockers—indeed, no council in Scotland has. However, it was suggested that we could influence guidelines and the future design of buildings, so it would be appropriate to go back to the minister.
Okay. Is that agreed?
Haulage Industry (PE876)
Petition PE876, which is from Phil Flanders, calls on the Scottish Parliament to conduct an inquiry into the prospects for the Scottish haulage industry and any knock-on impact on the Scottish economy.
Given that the convener is having so much fun with the inquiry, I suggest that we refer the petition to the Local Government and Transport Committee.
That is a very good suggestion. Is that agreed?
It was a good day at Prestwick.
It was very cold but enjoyable.
Railway Infrastructure and Services (Inverness, Thurso and Wick) (PE894)
Our final current petition is PE894, which is from the association of Caithness community councils. It calls on the Scottish Parliament to consider investment in infrastructure, rolling stock and timetabling as part of a strategic root-and-branch review of the provision of rail services between Inverness, Thurso and Wick.
Shall we seek the petitioners' views on the responses?
Yes.
We should also note the largely helpful tone of the responses, which is positive. That augurs well.
We look forward to receiving the petitioners' responses.
Meeting closed at 11:47.
Previous
New Petitions