Chamber and committees

This is a very important petition. I know that it talks primarily about Glasgow, but there are other locations across Scotland where people are suffering from the blight of violence and where young people who find it difficult to assimilate what they should or want to do choose to go out and be involved in antisocial behaviour and vandalism, which can sometimes lead to violence. The petitioner has given us some strong examples of what is taking place and has highlighted how social media is being used to publicise and promote some of these things. That, too, is a dangerous development.

I suggest that, as a first step, the committee might wish to seek evidence from those with lived experience across the board, because that will give us an opportunity to have further discussions with individuals about the details of the situation and to hear about certain circumstances. There is also a role for community safety, the police and other authorities to play in all of this, so it would be very useful for some of those people to be involved and to participate, too.

I agree. The federation makes some strong and valid points in the petition. It would be more appropriate for the petition to be considered by the Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee, given that that committee is already looking into inshore fisheries issues. That is the right place for it, because that committee will look at the issue in much more depth and with the appropriate precision.

This is an area that requires to be looked at in a little bit more depth in order to get more clarity, so I suggest that we write to the JCVI to ask whether it has any plans to review the need for, and the value of, the catch-up immunisation programme for males aged 25 and younger. I also suggest that we write to the Teenage Cancer Trust, Jo’s Cervical Cancer Trust, Young Scot and the Men’s Health Forum to seek their views on the issues raised by the petition. All of that would be of interest to us in clarifying things and seeing what would be required in future.

I thank Emma Harper for her presentation. She outlined that the purpose of the group is to promote and encourage Scots. However, the written application refers to ensuring that the Scottish Government takes forward legislation. Will you expand on how you intend to do that and what the purpose of the group is?

You cannot be anything other than impressed, convener, with the number of individuals who are seeking to be involved in the cross-party group and the organisations that it is aligning itself to. That gives us confidence that the group will be very active and will carry out its role collectively and responsibly. I am encouraged by that, and I look forward to seeing how the group progresses—I am sure that it will progress.

I acknowledge and understand the importance of the issue, because it has been raised in the past and there is no doubt that there are views about it across the chamber and the bureau. The fact that we are looking at the possibility of creating a pilot is encouraging, because that will give us the opportunity to look at the criteria for and the duration and flexibility of the whole process. I am glad that we have got this far, although I acknowledge that there is still some way to go to try and meet people’s views and opinions in the middle.

As a starter for 10, I think that we are going in the right direction and that proxy voting will enhance and support MSPs as we go forward. I am sure that there will be different views and opinions about all of that, but I think that the consensus at the end of the day will mean that we will end up with a proxy voting system of some kind that will support individuals who need it, and I am content to see that progress.

In its letter, the bureau also discusses the practical operation of the digital voting system which, as we know, we have had difficulties with in the past. It was said to be “robust”, but that was not always the case. There might be an opportunity for the digital system to be developed in such a way that it could enable proxy voting to be incorporated. The fact that that is being looked at is to be welcomed, because that would provide a bit more trust in the system.

The digital voting system has a part to play in how the process will progress.

The dialogue must be there. We have already said that trust is vital. Communication between the member, the proxy and the Presiding Officer is also vital to ensure that everyone is aware of what their roles and responsibilities are and that everyone is being looked after. That is important, too.

Yes, convener—I think that that would satisfy some of the elements in relation to having some clarity around a definition.

We do not anticipate that a large number of individuals will fall into that category. Only a minority of MSPs will require that facility. Whether that is for a short time or a longer time will depend on the circumstances that they find themselves in. I believe that it is important to get clarity, and the Presiding Officer will have a role to play in ensuring that such a scheme is managed effectively.

I concur with the convener. We require clarity from the cabinet secretary with reference to access to Stranraer and Cairnryan. Notwithstanding that the petitions have been here a long time, there is merit in trying to find more information and clarity before we get to the stage of closing them. I support the convener’s suggestion that we should get the information and not close the petitions at this stage.