Chamber and committees

One of the suggestions before us is that we might have an evidence session on the petition at a later date, which might allow us to bring that point in.

The next continued petition is PE1866, lodged by Daryl Cooper. It calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to introduce legislation so that wheelchair users can face frontward when travelling on a bus.

At our most recent consideration, the committee agreed to write to Pam Duncan-Glancy MSP to seek her views on the petition. I am pleased to say that she has sent a response that sets out a number of issues for wheelchair users attempting to access bus services, including: a lack of accessible buses that can lower to allow wheelchairs on board; no seating at some bus stops, meaning people with mobility problems cannot wait for the bus without being in significant pain or distress; poor joined-up transport, meaning that some routes are only partly accessible by bus; and only one wheelchair user being allowed on a bus at a time, meaning that wheelchair-using couples or friends must split up, which is unhelpful at the best of times, but is particularly challenging when travelling late at night.

We were slightly unimpressed by the responses that we received prior to writing to Pam Duncan-Glancy. I think that we thought that there was a bit of fudging in some of what we heard.

Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?

The next continued petition is PE1871, which is on a full review of mental health services. It was lodged by Karen McKeown on behalf of the shining lights for change group. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to carry out a full review of mental health services in Scotland, which should include consideration of the referral process, crisis support, risk assessments, safe plans, how integrated services work together, first response support and the support that is available to families that have been affected by suicide.

Members might be aware that the petition arose from the petitioner’s own experience. The petitioner’s partner, Luke, died by suicide in 2017 after asking for mental health support up to eight times in the week before his death. I remember that we were quite affected by the submission when we first considered it.

Once again, Monica Lennon joins us, as she has an interest in the petition. I will come to Monica in a moment.

At the previous consideration of the petition, the committee agreed to write to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care and key stakeholders. We have received several detailed responses, which I will summarise briefly.

In his response, the cabinet secretary highlights how the Scottish Government plans to improve mental health support across Scotland, including by providing additional funding, improving how systems work together, establishing service standards and investing in community support for adults. In September this year, the Scottish Government and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities will publish a new suicide prevention strategy, which will be accompanied by an initial action plan. A lived experience panel is being set up so that people with lived experience can advise on and inform mental health policy development.

In its submission, the Scottish Association for Mental Health suggests that almost one in four adults continue to wait longer than four months to access psychological therapies. SAMH’s research into service users’ experiences of mental health services during the pandemic revealed that more than a quarter of respondents indicated that their specialist treatment and support had stopped altogether because of the pandemic. That has been the experience of my constituents, and I am sure that it has also been the experience of other MSPs’ constituents.

The petitioner has provided two further written submissions to the committee. The first summarises a freedom of information request that she made to NHS Lanarkshire, which revealed that 74 per cent of patients were not admitted to hospital after attending accident and emergency for mental health reasons. The second is in response to the cabinet secretary’s submission. The petitioner states that, although she welcomes the increased funding, it is crucial to establish how the funding will be used, noting that a review—the aim of the petition—is

“necessary to determine which areas are failing and need reconstructed.”

She also suggests that a specialist crisis centre for mental health is needed.

I invite Monica Lennon to comment.

As there are no other suggestions, I think that we are content with that. It is an important issue but, given that the legal experts do not support action at the moment, I think that we just want to ask the Scottish Government what more it is going to do, potentially, and to close the petition at this stage.

Indeed. We have three petitions—PE1845, PE1890 and PE1915—that touch on parallel issues, so that is a sensible suggestion. Are we content to combine consideration of the petition with the others that we have in relation to Caithness?

Members indicated agreement.

It has been a long meeting but a great one, too, with our youngest-ever petitioner, a very sensible and worthwhile discussion about woodlands, and the consideration of a number of important petitions. I thank everybody for their participation and confirm that the committee’s next meeting will take place on 23 March.

We have one item to discuss briefly in private. I close the public part of the meeting.

I invite David Torrance to lead us into an area of discussion.

It is a fascinating thing to watch. I have to be honest and say that I walk down the mountains, not up; I tend to go up in a chairlift or a cable car, which allows me to look down on all the people who are doing the biking. A lot of reinforced body armour is associated with it now, because they expect to be thrown off their bikes at various points. However, as you said, it is an Olympic sport; it is one that is very much growing and for which there will be increasing demand. That was an interesting observation about its having an operating authority, which we might want to pursue.

Paul Sweeney, you wanted to come back in—just briefly, because we are coming to the end of our time.

Welcome back. We resume our consideration of PE1812, on Scotland’s remaining ancient, native and semi-native woodlands and woodland floors. We heard just a few moments ago from the petitioners, Audrey Baird and Fiona Baker, and I am now delighted to welcome to a round-table discussion a number of people who will be able to help us with our deliberations.

We have been joined in the committee room by Andrew Weatherall from the RSPB, Arina Russell from the Woodland Trust and Doug Howieson from Scottish Forestry. Joining us virtually are Claudia Rowse from NatureScot and Andy Leitch from Confor. I hope that everybody can see them on the screens, although if you are at the far end of the table, it is quite a reach. I welcome you all.

We hoped that we would be joined by our colleague Jackie Baillie, but she is in another committee meeting and is unable to get here at this point.

This is the first round-table discussion that the committee has held in the current session. It has all been virtual up to now, so it is great to be able to have witnesses with us in person.

Rather than going round everyone on every question, I ask witnesses who want to contribute on a particular issue to catch my eye or the eye of one of the clerks, who will let me know that you would like to comment. Our two witnesses who are participating virtually should put the letter R in the chat box. The clerks will look out for that and they will intimate to me you would like to join the discussion. The microphones will be operated by our broadcasting team, so there is no need for those of you who are in the room to press any buttons or get preoccupied about that.

We heard from the petitioners about the value of ancient native woodlands and whether adequate protections are in place given the big expansion of commercial forestry and the potential that ancient woodlands have for recreational use. What is your reaction, in general terms, to the essence of the petition? What are your views on the biodiversity of ancient, native and semi-native woodlands? What is their value to Scotland? Why are the woodland floors that support them also important? By way of introduction, I will bring in each of you in turn to get your comments on those questions.

Our second virtual participant is Andy Leitch. Welcome to the round table, Andy. I ask you to make a few introductory comments.