I thank Monica Lennon for her presentation, which outlined exactly where we are. There are still questions that need to be asked regarding where we go with this, because the Government has expressed an intention, which I believe is still there, but no progress is being made and things are dragging on. It is important that we continue to ask about the issue.

We should write to the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills again to seek clarity on the Scottish Government’s pilot to roll out universal free school meals in secondary schools, including the timescale for developing the carrying-out of the pilot and the engagement that has taken place with young people in the design of that pilot. That, in itself, will be useful, and Monica Lennon has eloquently set out what information is required.

There is much more to do before we can determine whether the policy is progressing. There seems to be a logjam at the moment, so let us see whether we can manoeuvre around that to see where we can take it.

You have identified that the visit was very informative. The courage that those individuals and their families displayed was obvious, and the information that we received from them was harrowing, because they were, without question, traumatised by the whole process. They gave one another a level of support and, in both of those locations, we saw the community working to help people, and the support mechanisms that are there. However, I do not think that the support mechanisms in the organisations that were outside those groups of people were as good. That was a concern, as the individuals who were victims were under the impression that they were not necessarily being totally supported.

It was quite disturbing to hear that the perpetrators were able to wander around and do things back in the community while the victims were now feeling a little bit housebound or unable to go places and do things because of that. There is a real concern there.

We also heard about the social media side of things, with trauma being recreated as the event is sent out across the web, which exacerbates the situation for the young individuals who were traumatised by the violence, as they have to revisit it and deal with their trauma again.

Like others who visited those locations, I learned a lot. As I said, the courage of the families and the young individuals needs to be commended. There is still work to be done on the issue, because there is no question but that there are gaps. The petitioner is strong on what he wants to happen on their behalf, which we have capacity to look at as a committee. The petition crosses over into issues related to the police, education and violence, and areas within the Scottish Government need to realise that. There are also organisations such as the Scottish Youth Parliament that should have a say on all this. A lot more can be done.

As you indicate, convener, this is a serious issue and one that we require to get more information on. We have the opportunity to write to a number of organisations, and I suggest that we write to EmilyTest, Victim Support Scotland, Universities Scotland, Scottish Women’s Aid, Rape Crisis Scotland and the National Union of Students to seek their views on the action that is called for in the petition, including the suggestion that students who are awaiting trial for sexual offences should have access to online classes only and that anyone who is convicted of such an offence should face disciplinary action.

As I have said, this is a serious issue, and I think that getting up-to-date information from those organisations will provide the committee with a much more structured way to take the petition forward, which is important because I think that there is merit in it progressing.

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the latest “Recorded Crime in Scotland” statistics, which show an increase in the overall level of crime in Scotland. (S6O-02439)

When the recorded crime statistics were published, the cabinet secretary boasted that they

“show Scotland continues to be a safe place to live”.

Crimes under the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018 are at their highest level since the law came into effect, and crimes of rape and attempted rape are at their highest level ever. Does the cabinet secretary think that victims of those crimes would say that Scotland is a safe place to live?

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I could not connect. I would have voted yes.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My app is not connecting. I would have voted yes.

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in the debate, and I congratulate my colleague Alexander Burnett on bringing it to the chamber.

The route to an effective just transition is an issue that has rightly received much scrutiny in recent years. It is important to remember, however, that failing to achieve the transition in a way that is fair and proportionate will impact on some communities far more than it will impact on others. The motion speaks about the impact of an unjust transition on rural communities. It is important to highlight that, in the view of such communities, the transition that they are witnessing is truly unjust.

The motion also speaks about the way in which many rural communities have overwhelmingly opposed onshore wind farm proposals, only to have their objections overruled through central Government diktat. We have already heard a number of examples of that, and there are others across my region. The Rhodders wind farm development in Clackmannanshire was rejected by the council in 2013, having received objections from several community groups. However, that refusal was promptly overturned by the Scottish Government the following year.

A true just transition for rural communities would be one that works with them and talks about their concerns instead of riding roughshod over them and—as we have heard—imposing large wind farm developments on them. It would ensure that such developments give back to the surrounding communities, which has been touched on.

The motion is right to speak about the calls for a mandatory minimum contribution rate from renewable energy developments. The Burnfoot Hill wind farm community fund, which provides grants for communities across Clackmannanshire, is an example of how such developments can provide compensation for the communities that are most affected. If rural communities are to experience a just transition, we must ensure that all such community funds give back to their surrounding communities in a way that is truly fair.

There are a number of ways in which the journey to net zero risks hitting rural communities the hardest of all. They include schemes such as the Scottish National Party’s workplace parking levy, which will hit people in rural communities who have no choice but to commute by car to the facilities and locations that they require to access.

I thank the minister for her intervention, but I say to her that rural communities will pay the price of those levies because they have little choice in how they are managed. The slow roll-out of electric charging points in rural settings will also make life increasingly difficult for rural commuters over the next decade.

Our rural communities already face tough challenges in the transition to net zero. Despite that, the Government is still forcing them to accept proposals to which they have objected. Alongside my Conservative colleagues, I will continue to stand up for rural communities, whose voices are not being heard throughout the transition process. Only by working with such communities and ensuring that we compensate and understand them can a just transition be achieved for people in every area of Scotland.

The analysis is very useful in showing where we are and how we have progressed through the various parliamentary sessions to where we find ourselves at this point. As other members have indicated, there is a balance to strike in relation to motions, and that has been discussed in the past.

As others have said today, it is very important that members have the right to recognise individuals and organisations in our regions and constituencies. Giving that recognition to, for example, individual unsung heroes is a very valid part of our role. Other motions are largely supportive of other things that happen. I think that the best way to describe it is that there are categories of motions. We might be the ones who lodge the motions, and it might be our staff who help to make that happen, but it is our constituents who receive the recognition.

Emma Harper’s point about monitoring the situation, to see whether there is a surge in such motions, might be the best way to manage it. We have to acknowledge the work that the chamber desk team does to manage the number of motions that are submitted to it on a weekly basis. Analysis of that team’s work might be useful to identify whether there have been changes that have helped the team members in dealing with the deluge of motions that come on a regular basis.

I am content that we continue as we are but that we also monitor the situation for the future, because I think that that would be useful.