Chamber and committees

I will turn to the clerks: have we written to the Scottish Youth Parliament and the Children’s Parliament in relation to our inquiry into deliberative democracy, and have we received any submissions from them?

Right. Have they come forward with any recommendations to us for anything that we might want to consider doing?

That concludes our public meeting. Thank you all. We meet again on 22 March. We will now consider item 4 in private.

PE1937, lodged by Gillian Lamarra, urges the Scottish Government to implement the option across all schools for primary school children to wear their physical education kit to school on the days when they have PE.

At our meeting on 28 September 2022, we agreed to write to the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and the Children and Young People’s Commissioner to seek their views on the action called for in the petition. I had not realised that it was as long ago as that; it seems fresher in my mind. In response, the commissioner set out their view that primary schools should adopt a flexible approach to policies on changing for PE classes. The commissioner’s response also highlights long-standing concerns about other parts of the learning estate, such as school toilets. The response also suggests that, although different PE changing practices among primary schools may be justified, the Scottish Government should explore whether national guidance is required to help create some degree of consistency.

We have also received a response from COSLA that highlights that extensive work is under way across councils and schools to support the vision of a Scotland where children’s human rights are embedded in all aspects of society and public services. COSLA goes on to state that local government believes that it would not be appropriate for the important matters raised in the petition to be subject to national-level policy or guidance, with schools best placed to determine the design and delivery of policy around wearing PE kits.

I imagine that the school estate across Scotland will be hugely varied, so some schools will find it easy to make different arrangements, while others will probably have to plan over a longer period to make such arrangements possible.

Colleagues, in the light of the submissions that we have received, what do you suggest would be an appropriate way forward?

Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the fourth meeting of the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee in 2023. I thank my colleague David Torrance for convening the previous meeting, when I was, unfortunately, off ill.

Our agenda is largely to consider seven continued petitions and five new petitions. We will not take any external evidence.

Our first item of business is to agree to take item 4 in private. Are we content to do that?

Members indicated agreement.

Item 2 is consideration of continued petitions, the first of which is PE1867, lodged by Scott Macmillan and calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to encourage the Scottish Qualifications Authority to establish a national qualification in British Sign Language at Scottish credit and qualifications framework level 2.

A BSL interpretation of our discussion will be on the Parliament’s BSL channel following today’s meeting.

We last considered the petition in November 2022, when we agreed to write to the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills to seek an update on the development of the next BSL plan and an exploration of how BSL national qualifications might be developed. We have received a response from the cabinet secretary that suggests that the Scottish Government will undertake engagement and consultation work to inform the priorities of the BSL national plan for 2023.

The cabinet secretary has also provided details on BSL awards currently available at SCQF levels 3 to 6. While delivery of those awards is still at an early stage, the cabinet secretary has indicated that uptake is increasing. The cabinet secretary goes on to state that, while the Scottish Government shares the petitioner’s vision for BSL to be more widely taught in schools, having qualifications in place does not necessarily lead to the language being offered at level 2 by schools and it remains the choice of schools to decide which languages to teach. The Scottish Government, therefore, does not believe that the steps sought by the petitioner are necessarily sufficient to support an increased take-up of BSL.

We have considered the petition on a number of occasions. Do colleagues have any suggestions in light of the cabinet secretary’s letter and her commitment to consult further on the 2023 plan?

The fact that the petitioner is satisfied with the progress and the response received gives weight to that recommendation. Are we agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

We thank the petitioner for raising the issue with us. As with all petitions that are closed, if, in due course, the petitioner feels that the commitments or evidence that we have received do not lead to a satisfactory outcome, they are entitled to bring the issue back by way of a fresh petition after 12 months.

PE1939, lodged by Suzanne Thornton, calls on the Scottish Government to demonstrate a commitment to health equality for young males born between 1 September 1997 and 1 September 2006 by allowing them to access the human papillomavirus vaccine via the national health service.

We previously considered the petition on 26 October 2022. At that point, we agreed to write to various organisations to gather further information on the issues raised. Members will be aware from our papers that we have received responses from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, Young Scot and the Teenage Cancer Trust. Importantly, in its response, the JCVI set out the reasons why a time-limited catch-up programme for boys was not pursued when the HPV vaccination was extended in 2018. The reasons provided included the different epidemiological situation now compared with when the programme for girls was launched; the good levels of herd immunity as a result of the girls’ programme; and the priority of extending the routine adolescent programme to boys while maintaining high uptake among girls. The JCVI also states that it has no plans to review the need for and value of a catch-up of the HPV immunisation programme for males aged 25 and under, as it believes that that would not be cost-effective.

I also draw members’ attention to the response from the Teenage Cancer Trust, which notes a disparity between the uptake rates of vaccination between males and females of 7.9 per cent and calls for the Scottish Government to include plans for monitoring uptake to be included in the 10-year cancer strategy.

Do members have any comments or suggestions?

No, that is a fair point. Mr Stewart, are you happy for us to leave the petition open while we pursue that point?

I note also the Teenage Cancer Trust recommendation in relation to the 10-year cancer strategy and the disparity that the trust had identified. That is not so much something for a response, but we should certainly write to the Scottish Government to draw its attention to the Teenage Cancer Trust’s representation.