Chamber and committees

PE1943, which was lodged by Victoria Mungall, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to introduce financial support mechanisms that would enable local authorities to work alongside developers in bringing brownfield sites back into use while also discouraging developments on greenfield land. When we last considered the petition, on 26 October, we agreed to wait until the national planning framework 4 was finalised. We also agreed to write to a number of organisations seeking their views.

Members will be aware that NPF4 has now been finalised and was approved by Parliament on 11 January. We have also received responses from Clyde Gateway, the Royal Town Planning Institute Scotland and the Royal Incorporation of Architects in Scotland. I also note that the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities declined to provide a formal response to the petition on this occasion.

The responses that we have received detail some of the challenges of developing long-term vacant and derelict sites, such as fragmented land ownership and ground conditions, while highlighting the funding streams that are available to support the redevelopment and regeneration of those sites. In particular, the Royal Town Planning Institute highlighted the work of the Scottish Land Commission on the matter and the recommendations to review and evaluate funding streams to ensure that they incorporate criteria that will help direct investment to parts of the country that need it most.

On that basis, do members have any suggestions?

Good morning, and welcome to the fifth meeting in 2023 of the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee. Our first—I hope, very easy—decision is whether to take item 4 in private. Are we content to take that item in private?

Members indicated agreement.

That is a sympathetic and comprehensive response. Are colleagues agreed that we will write to the petitioner, confirming the information that we have received and the fact that NPF4 has been published, and that we will close the petition?

Members indicated agreement.

Item 2 is consideration of continued petitions. First, PE1876, which was lodged by Lucy Hunter Blackburn, Lisa Mackenzie and Kath Murray, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to require Police Scotland, the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service and the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service to accurately record the sex of people who are charged with, or convicted of, rape or attempted rape. We last considered the petition almost a year ago, on 23 March 2022, so I apologise to the petitioners that we have not given it further consideration before now. At that stage, we agreed to write to a number of bodies to gather information on recording practices and the guidance underpinning those practices. That has taken some time.

Members will be aware that issues relating to the collection and use of data were discussed during consideration of the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill. To assist us in our consideration of the petition, the Scottish Parliament information centre has published an updated petition briefing that highlights the consideration that was given to data collection during the passage of that bill.

We have now received responses from the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Veterans, the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service and Police Scotland, copies of which are included in our meeting papers. The cabinet secretary’s response reiterates the Government’s position that recording practices are operational matters for the relevant bodies to determine. The cabinet secretary also refers to the chief statistician’s guidance, “Data collection and publication guidance—Sex, Gender Identity, Trans Status”, and he notes that there are no current plans to revise that guidance, which was published in September 2021.

Similarly, Police Scotland refers to its previous response to the petition, stating that police

“do not routinely ask the gender or sex of people with whom they interact”,

with records based on how a person presents to officers at the time of engagement. The response from Police Scotland also notes that DNA samples are obtained from all individuals who are accused of a sexual offence, with the DNA profile obtained from those samples indicating the person’s biological sex.

The committee has received a new submission from the petitioners, which offers their reflections on the various responses that we have received. The petitioners highlight a freedom of information response that shows a discussion between the Scottish Government and Police Scotland on how sex should be recorded. The petitioners understood that area to be the responsibility of the Scottish crime recording board, so there is, in effect, a contradiction. The petitioners have also raised concerns about Police Scotland’s policy for recording sex being developed and approved in advance of reforms to gender recognition coming into effect.

That summarises the submissions that we have received. What comments, thoughts or observations do colleagues have? I certainly feel that the petition deserves to remain open, but I look forward to hearing what colleagues have to say.

I am struck by the work placement point, because we really want individuals at that stage to be focused on delivering their best and getting their best from the work placement. Encouraging them to try to find alternative income streams through work while on a nine-month secondment is not really a healthy prospect or route in those circumstances, so I am inclined to agree.

PE1995 has been lodged by Catherine Anne McKay. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to develop a multi-agency approach to investigating spiking incidents to ensure that victims are given access to appropriate testing and that incidents are investigated robustly. A member of the petitioner’s family feels failed by the system after her negative experience of reporting a suspected spiking incident. I read, with some concern, about the incident as described.

The SPICe briefing notes that the Education, Children and Young People Committee held a round-table evidence session on spiking at its meeting on 26 January 2022.

In response to the petition, the Scottish Government outlines its work to address spiking, and that includes an investigative strategy to provide guidance and direction to staff responding to and investigating incidents of spiking; senior investigating officers leading on local spiking-related investigations; and round-table, cross-organisation meetings.

Do members have any comments or suggestions for action? Bear in mind that we cannot pursue the individual circumstance that the petitioner identified, because it is not competent for us to do so. There is a general issue in there, however, and that general issue certainly raised concerns within me about a potential variable attitude to such incidents.

It is about that person’s reputation as well.

Mr Stewart raised that.

We will write to the petitioner to explain that we cannot meaningfully advance the petition.

I know that “potholes” as a word can engender a degree of hilarity at times in certain quarters, but there is nothing funny about it if you drive through one and significantly damage your vehicle. It is becoming an almost anticipated experience for most motorists, which is not as it should be, and deeply concerning and worrying.