Chamber and committees

We have received apologies from Fergus Ewing and, as he is an independent member now, there is no substitute for him. Maurice Golden has been called to speak on amendments to a bill that he is progressing, which is being considered by our colleagues in the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee. He was here and then was summoned away, but we hope that he will join us again at some point during this morning’s proceedings.

Sorry to interrupt, but I think that Mr Russell’s point is different.

As we were talking about a moment ago, I would be interested to know if there is an expectation that the ScotSTAR service will need to be augmented in some way, irrespective of the initial planning that is going on. Is there such an expectation? However, I think that Mr Russell’s point is that if the general ambulance service is called on to ferry the mother and that journey was from, say, south of Wishaw to Aberdeen, the ambulance is going to be out of the system for quite some time, in an environment when we already know that there can be very long waiting times for ambulances.

There is a concern. You also said the transfer could be by private car, so I accept that there could be other options, but the current environment is not one that a mother or somebody contemplating being in this position might feel reassured by.

We now move to a healthcare petition that sits under the theme of sustainability of funding and health service infrastructure. PE2125, on ending the pause on new NHS building projects and prioritising capital funding for primary care buildings, has been lodged by Victoria Shotton, and it calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to restart overdue work on NHS Scotland buildings and prioritise funding for primary care building projects, to ensure that community health teams have the physical spaces and renovations required to treat their patients sufficiently and safely.

We last considered the petition on 19 February, when we agreed to write to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care. His response was that work to develop a whole-system NHS infrastructure plan was being progressed in two key stages, the first of which was focusing on short-term priorities that were already in progress and the other on longer-term investment priorities across the health estate.

In our evidence session with him, the cabinet secretary stated that, although the short-term plans were set out and voted on by Parliament as part of the budget process, the long-term capital position was under review as part of the infrastructure investment plan, which the Government expects to bring forward as part of the budget and spending review process.

Patrick Harvie initially indicated his wish to come and speak to this petition today, but I am grateful for his understanding in view of the responses that we have received. Do colleagues have any suggestions as to how we might proceed?

Thank you very much, Mr Mountain. It is encouraging to hear about the progress that has been made during the period in which we have been considering the petition.

PE2038, lodged by Ehlers-Danlos Support UK, calls on the Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to commission suitable NHS services for those with hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome and hypermobility spectrum disorders, and to consult patients on their design and delivery. We last considered the petition on 9 October 2024, when we agreed to write to the Scottish Government and NHS Wales.

The Scottish Government’s response to the committee highlights NHS Education for Scotland’s awareness-raising videos, which encourage healthcare professionals to “think rare” when people present to them. Work has been under way to consider other resources to improve diagnosis, including a suite of digital tools that enable convenient and quick decision making. The response also points to assessment and referral guidance for hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome that was developed by NHS Dumfries and Galloway last year.

The response from NHS Wales outlines its work to create an international pathway, which will offer a number of supports, including advice on diagnosis and treatment for primary care clinicians, direct access to therapy services for primary and community care rehab and supported self-management interventions, and clear referral guidance for those with the rarer forms of EDS that require genetic testing and speciality involvement. The Scottish Government has confirmed that it will speak to its Welsh counterparts about the project plan for Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and consider whether it would be feasible for a similar exercise to be taken forward in Scotland. The petitioner has provided a written submission that reiterates her view that EDS is not actually a rare condition, with studies suggesting a prevalence of about 1 in 227 and 1 in 500.

The submission also sets out a number of questions for the Scottish Government.

PE2080, which was lodged by Louise McKendrick, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to implement screening for people with Li-Fraumeni syndrome in line with the guidelines recommended by the UK Cancer Genetics Group.

We last considered the petition on 15 May 2024, when we agreed to write to Cancer Research UK, the Scottish Government and NHS Scotland genetic laboratories in Aberdeen, Dundee, Edinburgh and Glasgow. The Scottish hereditary cancer genetics group states that NHS Grampian, NHS Tayside, NHS Lothian and NHS Fife are all offering surveillance for patients with Li-Fraumeni syndrome, in line with the guidelines published by the UK Cancer Genetics Group in 2020. However, the SHCGG considers that there is a gap in the Scotland-wide process for managing patients.

In its submission, Cancer Research UK encourages the Scottish Government to strengthen its links with the research community in this area, as well as to engage in further dialogue from the UK National Screening Committee. The NSC has not made any recommendations about targeted surveillance or screening programmes for those with Li-Fraumeni syndrome.

PE2086, which was lodged by William Queen, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to acknowledge those who are injured by Covid-19 vaccines and to have the NHS offer appropriate treatment to them. We last considered the petition on 5 March this year, when we agreed to write to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care and NHS Scotland.

The Scottish Government’s response to the petition reiterates that, in many cases, it may be difficult for a clinician to explicitly determine whether an illness or condition is linked to vaccination, and that it understands how that lack of acknowledgement may be deeply frustrating for citizens. The submission reiterates that, if a patient has been vaccine injured and is experiencing a particular condition or symptom as a result, the NHS should treat them for that condition, as it would any other patient who displayed those symptoms, regardless of the cause. The petitioner’s most recent submission highlights differences in the national response to long Covid and vaccine injury. He states that resources have been given to address long Covid, whereas people with vaccine injury feel ignored.

As I set out in my opening remarks, we are now limited in the time remaining in this parliamentary session. I feel that we have made as much progress as we can with the petitions. For one or two of them, the petitioners may want to see the realisation of promises that have been made, and fresh petitions may well emerge in the Parliament’s new session.

Mr Torrance, do you have any recommendation for the committee?

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 the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service to accurately record the sex of people charged and convicted of rape or attempted rape.

We are joined this morning by our MSP colleagues Tess White and Carol Mochan—good morning, both. I remind colleagues that the Scottish Government’s previously stated position is that the ask of the petition is an operational matter for the relevant bodies and that the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service and the SCTS have indicated that they are operating with data received from reporting agencies, including Police Scotland.

Chief Constable Jo Farrell answered the committee’s questions on this matter in an evidence session on 12 November, when she unequivocally stated that Police Scotland supports the petition and that a man who commits rape or attempted rape should be—and will be—recorded by Police Scotland as a male. Although the chief constable agreed that, at times, Police Scotland messages have been mixed, she clarified that Police Scotland has been recording the biological sex in relation to rape and sexual offences, and that that can be demonstrated in all 16,000-plus relevant offences recorded since 2018.

We also heard that Police Scotland is actively undertaking a broader review of the terminology and recording practices that it uses to collect and record sex and gender data in order to recommend improvements, and that review is informed by developments in law and statutory guidance, human rights advice and on-going engagement with stakeholders. The chief constable expects a substantial update on this work to be provided through the Scottish Police Authority next year.

Additionally, in mid-October, Police Scotland decided to extend the recording of a person’s biological sex and, where relevant, their transgender status to suspects and victims of all crimes and offences. The chief constable indicated that Police Scotland will implement that at pace across all relevant data systems, starting with nine priority systems, which include custody, criminal justice cases, intelligence and crime recording.

In an additional submission, the petitioners expressed their satisfaction with Police Scotland’s position toward the petition. They also ask that the committee now writes to Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service and the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service to seek confirmation that they will follow Police Scotland’s lead and not retrospectively alter any record of a person’s sex, and also to seek similar reassurance from the Scottish Prison Service, although it should be noted that that would go beyond the scope of the petition itself.

Before I invite suggestions from colleagues, I ask Tess White and Carol Mochan whether they would like to make a contribution. I must ask that they do so briefly, given the time pressures that I am afraid that we now have.

That is helpful, and members may come back on that issue as we progress.

Before I bring in Davy Russell, I have one final question that I think it would be helpful to understand. Minister, can you set out what types of cases will be handled by each level of the national service?

That would be helpful. This is the guts of any reassurance about the capacity of the model to cope. What timeline do you imagine the model evolving over?

If I am looking at this in political chunks, is it right that sometime in the first half of the next parliamentary session, which begins in May 2026, you would expect the transition to have been completed?

Good morning, and welcome to the 19th meeting in 2025 of the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee. Our first item of business is to decide whether to take item 4 in private, to consider the evidence that we will hear this morning. Are colleagues content to do so?

Members indicated agreement.

Progress has been made. Indeed, it seems like quite a successful outcome for the petition, notwithstanding the fact that it has been some time since we were last able to consider it.