Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 21 April 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1119 contributions

|

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 26 March 2024

Paul Sweeney

It is important that you have highlighted those examples of interventions that are showing promise. Are you engaged with local integration joint boards and health and social care partnerships to highlight the fact that, given the potential financial pressures that they face in the coming financial year, they should not take decisions that might undermine or impact on those programmes, which target support at people who are facing such problems?

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 26 March 2024

Paul Sweeney

I am conscious of the need not to try the convener’s patience, but I just want to ask—

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 26 March 2024

Paul Sweeney

That is a helpful indication from the minister.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 26 March 2024

Paul Sweeney

I want to ask a question about the discussion in the 2018 study. There was a business and regulatory impact assessment—a BRIA—on price elasticity of demand, which found that alcohol is generally quite an inelastic product; in other words, as price increases, consumer behaviour does not change very much. Basically, that means that a rent is created that flows to the retailer or vendor of the product at the expense of the consumer. It was observed that there were points where the price becomes more elastic, such as with off-trade cider. We have seen evidence of some of the particularly potent ciders reducing in popularity as a result of minimum unit pricing.

The most recent study by Public Health Scotland did not seem to address the analysis around price elasticity of demand. Might the minister or her colleagues be able to narrate what they have found in that regard? I know that the University of Sheffield model found that heavier drinkers were more responsive to price change. Nonetheless, people with alcohol dependence are more likely to continue to consume alcohol, although they will perhaps find themselves in a more financially distressed position as a result.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 26 March 2024

Paul Sweeney

That is helpful. Have there been any reports back from the on-trade? I know that, in the Sheffield model, an elasticity was observed in spirits being traded in on-trade bars relative to beer. Was that feedback that came from the industry? Did it observe a change in on-trade consumer behaviour?

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 26 March 2024

Paul Sweeney

We discussed earlier some of the challenges about financing public services, particularly those that are targeted at harm reduction in communities through integration joint boards and so on. We discussed the dynamics of minimum unit pricing as being basically a rent for private sector retailers, which creates an extra income for them. That juxtaposition jars with me. I realise that there are policy limitations, but is the Government looking at opportunities to capture some of the revenue to bolster the public finances?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 20 March 2024

Paul Sweeney

Thank you very much, convener. It is a pleasure to be back before the committee on such an interesting petition. It has elicited significant public interest, most recently in a BBC Radio 4 documentary called “Motorway City” by the journalist Allan Little, which covered in great detail the history of the construction and development of the Glasgow inner ring road and the current challenges that it faces.

The correspondence from Glasgow City Council is encouraging. It has established a working relationship with Transport Scotland, the statutory agency that owns the trunk road infrastructure through Glasgow, to look at options for mitigation, and members of the public, other stakeholders, the petitioner and adjacent activists have proposed discrete ideas around rationalisation of slip roads, capping and so on that are worth further investigation.

I wonder whether it might be feasible for the committee to consider inviting the officials from Transport Scotland, who ultimately report to the Scottish ministers, and indeed to this Parliament, to further elaborate on their perspectives on what options are available. The transport minister might also want to come before the committee to set out their position on how they propose to work with Glasgow City Council to investigate the options. That might allow for greater transparency, public awareness and scrutiny of what is going through this Parliament. If committee members were minded to consider those proposed actions, that would be a positive development for this petition and would anchor the Parliament’s role in the matter much more securely.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

New Petitions

Meeting date: 20 March 2024

Paul Sweeney

Thank you, convener. It is a pleasure to address the members of the committee on this petition. I have been in correspondence with the petitioner over the past few months about issues around enhancement to the Park conservation area in the west end of Glasgow, which speaks to a broader issue around improving the guidance and regulations on conservation areas and the obligations on local authorities.

The petitioner’s particular idea was to reinstate heritage-style lampposts and make various other improvements to the area but there was not, in their view, sufficient support or capacity to help them to achieve their objectives. Similarly, there are concerns that roads authorities and other utilities can scar historic streetscapes, remove street furniture that is of a historic nature and undertake similar interventions without any statutory enforcement or oversight.

11:15  

In light of some of the flaws in the current legislation as set out in the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 and some of its adjacent legislation, such as the Building (Scotland) Act 2003, there is an opportunity for the committee to consider inviting stakeholders to feed in on the issue, and to establish whether there are reasonable grounds for improvements to the current legislation or indeed supplementary guidance. Certainly, in my interactions with stakeholders, there have been concerns that the regulations on conservation areas are not sufficiently robust and that there is significant opportunity to establish best practice, or at least to communicate where best practice is being achieved to other parts of the country.

To that end, I suggest that perhaps Historic Environment Scotland, the Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland, Save Britain’s Heritage, the Glasgow Building Preservation Trust and the Glasgow City Heritage Trust might be reasonable stakeholders to approach in the first instance to invite to feed in to the exercise and perhaps allow us to establish whether there are opportunities for further improvements to the current legislation. I should declare an interest, as a trustee of Glasgow City Heritage Trust.

That would be a worthwhile way for the committee to move the petition forward.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 March 2024

Paul Sweeney

That was helpful—thank you.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 March 2024

Paul Sweeney

I want to bring up an issue that was raised when we questioned the witnesses last week. A member of the Free Church of Scotland raised some concerns about the impact of the offences in the bill on the work of hospital chaplains and chaplaincy services. There might well be some scenarios in which they are within the 200m zone; in that respect, I am thinking of the Royal hospital for children and the Queen Elizabeth university hospital in Glasgow. They have sanctuaries that are non-religious spaces but which are places where people might want to speak to a spiritual leader or a chaplain. Similarly, there is a chaplaincy chapel on the fourth floor of the Princess Royal maternity building in Glasgow royal infirmary. Would it be prudent to consider an amendment that would provide comfort to or an exemption for people seeking chaplaincy services or chaplains who are registered with a health board?