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

|

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 7 December 2022

Paul Sweeney

There is provision for free bus travel. Why is it so important to extend that to rail travel?

10:15  

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 7 December 2022

Paul Sweeney

Another key point about support from our pharmacy network more generally was about ensuring that people who are released from custody or those who are caring for them if they have a support network are provided with naloxone. The evidence that has been provided has indicated that that is a patchy practice. What is the minister doing to ensure that it is more of a standard protocol?

10:30  

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 7 December 2022

Paul Sweeney

I have one final question, if I may, convener. A key part of the wider network that supports people being released from custody is referrals to supervised overdose prevention facilities, which were highlighted as a key measure in the reduction of harm while someone is going from a supervised setting to being unsupervised. I am cognisant of the Glasgow pilot on such a facility. Can the minister provide an update on progress with that pilot and on the interaction with local custody settings as a mechanism for referring vulnerable people to it?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 7 December 2022

Paul Sweeney

That is very helpful.

I understand that approximately 78 per cent of those who use the disabled bus travel concessionary scheme have a companion allowance, so that seems to be a major aspect of using that scheme.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 7 December 2022

Paul Sweeney

Do you have any idea of the total number of people who might utilise such a scheme in Scotland? I want to get an idea of the scale of that relative to the overall passenger cohort in Scotland.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 7 December 2022

Paul Sweeney

I think that we have that.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 7 December 2022

Paul Sweeney

Yes. Overall, we are talking about 146,000 people. If that is broken down into different components, disabled +1 companions number about 105,000. That is helpful.

A point has been made about bus travel versus rail travel, but a lot of journeys are highly integrated, and people might need to take a bus and then a train. Would the approach help to make it more seamless for people who have a visual impairment to navigate the transport system more generally?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 7 December 2022

Paul Sweeney

It also might be interesting to make inquiries regarding the financing of the scheme. I note that the current concessionary travel scheme for older and disabled persons has a 55 per cent rate against the full adult single fare, and it has an overall budgetary cap of £226 million in the current financial year. It would be interesting to see what the utilisation rate of that budget is and whether the proposal could be funded through the existing provision, if it is the case that it is underutilised.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

New Petitions

Meeting date: 7 December 2022

Paul Sweeney

I support those proposals.

I note that a similar petition was considered in 2014, at which point it was recommended that there should be oversight, but the Government advised that it was too soon to consider doing that in the light of the legislation in 2002. It feels like we are sufficiently distant from that juncture and should now reconsider the issue and whether there might be a means for the Scottish Parliament, as an institution, to hold greater oversight of the ombudsman. Perhaps that could be done through a discreet committee that could be the ultimate arbitrator or escalating body.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

New Petitions

Meeting date: 7 December 2022

Paul Sweeney

I share the concerns raised by the petitioner about whether home reports are fit for purpose. I declare an interest as a trustee of the Glasgow City Heritage Trust. In tenemental properties in particular, there are major deficiencies in assessing overall building condition in home reports in Glasgow.

Our colleague Graham Simpson MSP has reconvened the cross-party working group on maintenance of tenement scheme property. Perhaps we should write to Under One Roof, the charity that provides impartial advice to home owners and people purchasing homes, as well as the Built Environment Forum Scotland, which is the secretariat for the working group on tenement maintenance. I know that an action on the matter is to improve the standard and quality of home reports.

I also understand that the Scottish Law Commission is undertaking a project on improving tenement law. It might be that an element of its work is about improving the regulations on home reports. There are major issues with people purchasing property based on highly defective information that leaves them liable for significant repairs to, say, the roof of a tenement that was not assessed as part of a home report. For example, if somebody has a ground floor flat, they are still liable for the roof, which will not have been looked at as part of the home report.

The home report is particularly problematic in relation to tenemental properties.