Chamber and committees

I think that Mr Golden was pointing out that we are a very masculine committee, which perhaps might mean that we are not giving due consideration, as others might, to some of the issues that are being raised here.

I understand the reasons that Mr Torrance gave but, at the same time, I think that Mr Golden makes a perfectly reasonable point. We will keep the petition open and write, as suggested, in relation to the issues in the petition. It occurred to me when I was updating colleagues that we can also just check with NHS Education for Scotland that the resource does materialise by the end of March. By the time we next consider the petition, we will know whether that package was properly introduced, which I think is a reasonable additional step.

Item 3 is the consideration of new petitions. For those who might be joining our proceedings online this morning, having heard that a petition that they had submitted was to be considered, I note that, in advance of so doing, we ask the Scottish Government for comment and the Scottish Parliament’s independent research unit, the Scottish Parliament information centre, for a briefing on the petition. We do that because, historically, in previous sessions, if we did not do so, that was the first thing that the committee recommended that we do, which often led to an extended delay in our consideration of the issues raised.

The first of the new petitions is PE2056, which was lodged by Stephen Gauld. It calls on the Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to introduce legislation that provides ministers with the power to call in and, potentially, override council decisions on the hire of public land for large-scale events. Mr Gauld tells us that, over a number of years, his business has tried to hire public land for large-scale events but that the requests have been refused by local authorities. He suggests that his is not the only business that has been impacted.

As the SPICe briefing notes, although the Parliament has legislative competence to enact primary and secondary legislation that impacts local authorities, it is generally up to local authorities to determine how they use their land and property. The Minister for Local Government Empowerment and Planning advises that it is not a matter for the Scottish Government to intervene on and refers to the Verity house agreement, which includes a commitment for local and national government to respect each other’s democratic mandates.

We have received a response from the petitioner, Mr Gauld, commenting on the minister’s response, emphasising the call for a change in the law and noting that the Verity house agreement is not legally binding. Do colleagues have any comments or suggestions for action? Mr Ewing, are you thinking of contributing here?

Part of me wonders whether some local authorities—perhaps smaller local authorities, which are in locations where such permissions might be being sought—feel that their own resource is such that it is easier to say no than it is to say yes, because saying yes involves them in the administration of certain matters for which they feel that they currently do not have the capacity to take forward. That might be, in part, what underpins their views. I would be interested to know whether COSLA felt that there was any substance to that consideration.

Therefore, with the various suggestions that have been made, we will keep the petition open. Although we accept some of the evidence that we have received, and the comment from the Scottish Government, there are issues here that it would be useful for us to explore.

The second of our new petitions, on which colleagues will note that they have a late submission on the table before them, is PE2064, which has been lodged by Julie Mitchell. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to ensure that under-16s who are charged with rape are treated as adults in the criminal justice system. The SPICe briefing explains that certain offences for children over the age of 12 and under the age of 16 must be jointly reported by the police to the children’s reporter and the procurator fiscal. Rape is considered to be an offence that requires joint reporting, and the procurator fiscal decides whether prosecution will proceed in the adult justice system.

Regarding the sex offenders register, where a case proceeds in the adult criminal justice system and results in a conviction for rape, the notification requirements apply regardless of age. However, the length of the notification period is reduced for those under the age of 18. The Lord Advocate is reviewing diversion from prosecution as it relates to sexual offences, to consider whether it is being used appropriately. The Scottish Government’s response to the petition notes that its policy position is to keep children out of the criminal justice system wherever possible and appropriate. However, it recognises

“the need to strike a balance between supporting children who come into conflict with the law and ensuring that our communities are safe and that victims are supported.”

Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?

Are we content to take forward Mr Torrance’s recommendation and to combine that with the issues that are raised in PE1947?

Some people are even driving camper vans these days.

Good morning, and welcome to the third meeting in 2024 of the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee.

Our first agenda item is simply to agree to take in private agenda item 4, which relates to evidence that we will hear this morning. Are members content to do so?

Members indicated agreement.

Our academics suggested that the historical territorial gangland violence among young people is less of an issue than it once was and that the pattern of violence and the way in which it occurs are different.

The committee is particularly concerned about younger people. The victims of violence we met were 12 or 13 years old. One was the subject of violence on a school bus. One was a slightly withdrawn individual who was artificially befriended and more or less invited by appointment to be assaulted. We might have a chance to look at some of that in more detail later. The victims were girls and they were attacked by other girls. The committee heard about horrendously despicable acts involving people of a relatively young age, egged on by the peer group in attendance. Are those two examples uniquely awful or, in the pattern of trends, is there a trend of growth, however small, in youth violence in that age group?