Official Report 397KB pdf
Public and Voluntary Sector Services (Cuts) (PE1158)
Public Service Contracts (National Framework) (PE1231)
I propose that we refer the petitions back to the Public Petitions Committee, from whence they came—if that is permissible—rather than close them, because that committee might wish to consider them further.
Given that the petitions have been subsumed into the work that we have done, the very least that we can do is to keep them open until we have had the debate on the report that we have produced, so that the petitioners are aware that something at least has resulted from the effort that they have made in raising a genuine issue.
It means that we conclude our work on the petitions. We have referred to the petitions in our report on local government finance. We could notify the petitioners of the evidence that we have taken and the work that we have done on the petitions and refer them to the report and the debate. They will have the opportunity to lobby members ahead of the debate.
I agree with that.
John Wilson suggested that we refer the petitions back to the Public Petitions Committee. Has that happened before? Have other committees said that they have completed their work on a petition and will not be doing any more work on it, but if the Public Petitions Committee wishes to pass it on to someone else that is up to it? Is there a precedent for that?
I am not sure. We would notify the Public Petitions Committee of our work on the petitions. If members of that committee wished to comment on it, that would be up to them. We could do everything that has been suggested: draw to the petitioners’ attention the work that we have done; inform them of the future debate and the references in the report; and notify the Public Petitions Committee of the work that we have done. Hopefully, we can formally close both petitions on that basis. Is that okay?
We move to agenda item 4, which is to consider whether to close petitions PE1158 and PE1231. Members will recall that the petitions were subsumed into our inquiry into local government finance, on which we have now reported. At our meeting on 9 September 2009, we took oral evidence from Kevin Hutchens, the originator of PE1158, and representatives of the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations, Unite and Unison, which were the co-petitioners for PE1231. Are members content to formally close both petitions and to notify the petitioners accordingly?
Are there any other views?
I have a slightly pedantic question. What does “formally close” mean in the context of this committee, with reference to the petitions? We might have a debate on our report and, no doubt, the issues raised in the petitions can be discussed in that debate, but what does closing the petitions mean for this committee?
Previous
Subordinate Legislation