Chamber and committees

I call Naomi Bremner. Naomi, can you hear me? Would you like to speak?

Petition PE1988, which was lodged by Sue Wallis, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to review the process for allowing raw sewage discharge from homes into Scottish coastal waters, provide additional funding to the Scottish Environment Protection Agency for enforcement and introduce legislation to ban households from discharging raw sewage.

The committee previously considered the petition on 8 March, when we agreed to write to SEPA and the Law Society of Scotland. The Law Society of Scotland’s written submission outlines the process and requirements during the conveyancing process for properties with no connection to a mains sewer or private septic tank, which was of interest to members of the committee.

The most recent submission from SEPA confirms that the review of its approach to regulating private sewage discharges has concluded. It points to a service level statement that sets out SEPA’s intention to restrict the majority of its complaint action to providing advice and guidance. SEPA states that the onus will be on owners and operators to ensure that treatment systems meet the required standards and are maintained in good working order. Deterrent action by SEPA will take place through specific campaigns targeted at known problem areas.

The petitioner highlights the selective nature of SEPA’s approach and states that that will not help all areas. She shares that a member of staff at SEPA informed her that it does not have the resources to monitor agreements made by homeowners to repair broken pipes. The petitioner has asked that a new law be created to legally impose timescales for changing to a private processing system or connection to the mains sewer.

Do members have any comments or suggestions as to how we might proceed? I seek inspiration, colleagues.

Welcome back. At this stage, I offer an apology from our colleague David Torrance, who is unable to be with us this morning. The committee sends its best wishes to David, and we look forward to seeing him again in the new year, hopefully.

We move to the next of our continued petitions. PE1610 was lodged by Matt Halliday, and PE1657 was lodged by Donald McHarrie on behalf of the A77 action group. PE1610 calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to upgrade the A75 Euro route to dual carriageway for its entirety as soon as possible, and PE1657 calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to dual the A77 from Ayr Whitletts roundabout south to the two ferry ports located at Cairnryan, including the point at which the A77 connects with the A75. We last considered the petitions in April, when we agreed to write to the then Minister for Transport, Kevin Stewart.

We are joined this morning by our colleague Brian Whittle. Good morning, Brian. I will invite you to comment in a moment.

The response that we received from the then minister states that Transport Scotland officials are aware of the environmental impact assessment report on the A75 and A77 and are considering its findings. However, the response notes that the report appears to reflect only the positive impacts of dualling, and does not consider the outcomes of the strategic transport projects review 2, and the response notes that the report does not provide any benefit cost ratios to summarise the overall value for money. The response also states that prioritisation work for the STPR2 recommendations is being undertaken, and that that will feed into the publication of a delivery plan later this year—but I take it that that will probably be early next year. Until that work has been completed, it will not be possible to provide timescales for delivery of individual recommendations.

The petitioner expresses the view that the then minister’s response seems to disregard the report. He highlights the positive inward investment seen in Maybole since the completion of the £29 million bypass there. The submission also questions how the Scottish Government’s target of zero road fatalities by 2050 will be possible when the conditions on the south-west of Scotland’s road network are considered.

Our colleague Finlay Carson is unable to join us this morning, but he has sent a written submission in support of the petitions. He reports that, in the past five years, there have been seven fatal collisions on the A75. In the light of the UK Government’s £8 million funding for improvements to that road, Mr Carson suggests that the Scottish Government should redirect any budget savings to accelerate improvements on the A77.

Brian Whittle, before I invite committee members to comment at this stage, would you like to contribute to our discussion?

Are colleagues content that we initiate those actions?

Members indicated agreement.

Yes, I am sure that we can do that. We might also write to the minister to request details of the on-going exploratory work on potential changes to the support that is available for social work students. I would like some reflection on the thought process that has underpinned the freezing of the bursary fund since 2012-13, because that must affect the number of students that it is capable of supporting. That is more than a decade. I recognise that there are always pressures on funding—no doubt that will be part of any response—but the fund has been frozen over a long period, so other issues might underpin the situation. I would also be interested to know whether, in response to the issues that the petition raises, the Government’s work will consider the introduction of a bursary for third-year and fourth-year undergrad students on work placements.

We might also write to the Scottish Social Services Council to ask what improvements it made following the 2021-22 review of its postgraduate bursary policies and request an update on its review of practice learning finance. In addition, we might ask when it expects to receive the paper from the higher education institution leads on poverty issues facing students, which ties in with Mr Choudhury’s request in relation to housing issues, as well.

As there are no other suggestions from members, are we content to proceed on that basis?

Members indicated agreement.

That brings us to PE1999, lodged by William Hunter Watson, which calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to ensure that the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is fully implemented in Scotland.

We last considered the petition on 22 March, when we agreed to write to the Scottish Government to ask when its response to the Scottish mental health law review would be published. The Scottish Government’s response outlines its high-level priorities for inclusion in its reform programme. They include reforming the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000 to reflect the requirements of the UNCRPD more clearly.

The Scottish Government will also consult further on options to address deprivation of liberty in circumstances in which people do not have the capacity to make decisions about their care and treatment. The priorities also include supporting decision making, reforming the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003, human rights enablement, enhancing the rights and role of carers, reducing coercion across the system and strengthening accountability and scrutiny in the system.

Do members have any comments or suggestions?

I thank the petitioner for lodging the petition. I understand the depth of feeling in relation to the issues concerned, but I am afraid that, in this instance and at this time, the committee is not able to advance that.

That brings us to the end of our public session. We will next meet on 24 January 2024.

I was struck, because it is something that is very easily said, that the skill sets in some technical areas might be deficient. To paraphrase Mr Campbell, I think that that was the mainlander speaking to the islander. The islander speaking to the mainlander would say, “You lot cannot walk and chew gum at the same time, whereas we are used to doing that on a regular basis.” In other words, the skill sets of people on the islands are very often underestimated. I will not ask you to comment, but that was the conclusion that I drew.

Rona MacKay, would you like to add anything on that?

Thank you for that, and thank you to you all for your evidence. The petition was lodged at the start of the session and it has maintained the interest of the committee since 2021—as Fergus Ewing said. We are very grateful for the evidence that all three of you gave this morning.

Colleagues, can I get your agreement that we will consider the evidence further in private at a later date?

Members: Indicated agreement.