Public Petitions Committee, 19 Jan 2005
Meeting date: Wednesday, January 19, 2005
Official Report
252KB pdf
Petitions (Resubmission)
Agenda item 3 concerns a summary of evidence on the resubmission of petitions. On 15 September 2004, the committee issued a call for written evidence on its proposals to amend rule 15.5 of standing orders, on the admissibility of petitions, to ensure that once a petition has been closed, a further petition in the same or similar terms may not be introduced in the same parliamentary session within one year of the date on which the petition was closed.
The call for written evidence from individuals and organisations with an interest in the Parliament's public petitions system was intended to assist the Public Petitions Committee in presenting its proposals to the Procedures Committee, which has agreed to consider the proposals as part of its work programme.
A summary of the evidence that was obtained has been circulated to members. On the basis of the responses received, are we happy to ask the clerks to produce a draft report for the committee to consider at its next meeting?
The proposal is sensible and I am pleased that the bulk of the responses support it. The issues to which paragraphs 17 to 19 of the summary of evidence refer are also important and we should include them in our report for the Procedures Committee's consideration. Should we read into the Official Report the items that we want to cover?
No. We should discuss that when the subject returns to the agenda. This morning we are asking whether the clerks can proceed, on the basis of the responses, to draw up a report, which we can debate at our next meeting.
I am happy for the clerks to produce a draft report. Robbie the Pict's submission says:
"the people of Scotland have a sovereign right since the contract with England's King William in 1689 to petition the Scottish Parliament."
Will the report address whether that is still legally binding?
People can petition the Scottish Parliament.
Will the proposal not to allow petitions to be resubmitted be construed as breaching that contract, if it is still a relevant law?
We can check that out.
We should address the point, since it was made in the submission.
We are asking for a report to be drawn up on the basis of what has been submitted, so the point will have to be considered.
I was informed just before the meeting started that Joanne Clinton, who is one of our clerks, is moving to the business team. On the committee's behalf, I thank Joanne very much for all that she has done on the committee's behalf. She has worked tirelessly for a good while for the committee. I hope that she has enjoyed that; we have certainly enjoyed working with her. For those who do not know, I meet Jim Johnston and the other clerks regularly to talk about the agenda. I have always been impressed by the fact that Joanne has sat patiently waiting on Jim and me to finish our discussion of the football before we got down to the agenda. She never complained once—thanks very much for allowing us to do that. We give her our best wishes in her new role in the Parliament and thank her for all that she has done for us.
Meeting closed at 12:00.