Chamber and committees

Thank you. I think that the committee agrees to refer the four petitions to the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee in the context of its wider consideration of health inequalities. Are we agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

It is worth noting that the whole process began with the previous Presiding Officer’s parliamentary commission, which I sat on and which looked at the whole question of public participation and deliberative democracy. I know that a lot of work has been done here in Parliament and by the Government in the time since.

We have a series of questions. Just last week, we had at a focus group at a deliberative democracy event in order that we could understand the issue. One of the issues that everyone will be wrestling with is the expectation that is created in the minds of people who participate that something will follow, which will be a challenge in relation to the reputation and sustainability of the concept, over time. We will touch on that later. I will start off with some technical questions, before colleagues come in.

We met the group and had a very productive and worthwhile evidence session. How did the Government decide on the composition of the group? I know that Scottish Government officials were involved; were they active and equal members of the group or were they there in a supporting and advisory role? What was the structure and how was it put together?

Thank you very much. We will come to solutions in a second or two.

The next petition is PE1915, which was lodged by Billy Sinclair. It calls on Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to reinstate Caithness County Council and Caithness NHS Board. Billy’s position is that local delivery has suffered greatly since services fell under the aegis of NHS Highland and the Highland Council. That is evidenced by the 120-mile journey to Raigmore hospital in Inverness that many expectant mothers have to contemplate. Following his evidence last week, he has provided a further written submission, of which members have a copy.

The final petition is PE1924 from Rebecca Wymer, which calls on Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to compete an emergency in-depth review of women’s health services in Caithness and Sutherland. Rebecca has stated that the services that are now being provided are in breach of basic human rights, and she is concerned that there could be loss of life due to failures in gynaecology care provision. In the wider round-table discussion, she echoed the point about it being difficult and unattractive for people to move to professional positions in Caithness due to the lack of women’s healthcare and maternity services. People who are coming from areas where those services are taken very much for granted suddenly become aware that the absence of them is potentially quite a serious issue.

I should add that the journey that I mentioned earlier was the equivalent of a journey from Edinburgh to York, not Edinburgh to Newcastle. I understated the scale of the journey that was used by way of illustration.

Rebecca, too, has provided a further written submission. It was suggested—I think by some of our MSP colleagues—that the way forward for the petitions might be for us to consider whether to refer them. Do colleagues have any thoughts on that?

My experience is the same—I am not sure. At some stage, as virtual events become more commonplace, it might be useful for us, beyond the context of this discussion, to understand the material impact on the management and control of the outcome of the discussions.

Thank you for that, Mr Whittle. Minister, do you and your colleagues want to pick up on that point? Given that our formal questioning has finished, we would also be happy to hear any concluding remarks that you want to make.

Thank you. I wonder whether we might also write to some of the bodies that represent victims and survivors, just to call in aid to the argument and to get some understanding of their views on widening the eligibility criteria. They must be aware of the particular circumstances of the groups that are falling through the net, and might be able to identify others that they would say are in a similar situation. Do we agree to write to those bodies, together with the suggestions that have already been made?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you. It is an important petition; we will keep it open and see what progress we can make.

I will suspend the meeting briefly. The minister is now with us, so we will be able to discuss our final continued petition in a moment.

Hold on a second, Mr Whittle—what has overtaken Whitelee? It used to be the biggest.

Although you are being slightly circumspect about your overall reaction to the report, would you go so far as to say that you feel that the group fulfilled your expectations and fulfilled the brief that was set for it?

Mr Kinnaird, I heard you say that a second public event was to be incorporated. Is there a definition of what constitutes a public event?