Seòmar agus comataidhean

We therefore close that petition.

That brings us to the conclusion of the formal part of this morning’s business. I would be grateful if colleagues stayed for just a few minutes longer.

Meeting closed at 11:10.

There were quite a lot of additional comments. However, notwithstanding that, I think that we are minded to support Mr Torrance’s suggestion. We also thank the petitioner, in the hope that the issue will be properly explored in the next session of Parliament.

In so doing, we will seek to write to the cabinet secretary, urging that clarity be given with regard to the publication, sooner rather than later, of the guidance to which she refers and which will facilitate councils’ consideration of these matters.

Do members agree with those suggestions?

Members indicated agreement.

We return to an issue that has been bubbling along as we have addressed other petitions. PE2160, which was lodged by Tina Dawn Marshall, calls on the Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to publish its energy strategy and just transition plan to address environmental, infrastructure and land use issues.

We last considered the petition on 24 September, at which point we agreed to write to the Scottish Government. The written response from the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Action and Energy highlights a number of recently published policy decisions on energy, including the green industrial strategy in 2024, a draft updated sectoral marine plan for offshore wind energy, an update to the offshore wind policy statement, and the Scottish marine recovery fund. An offshore wind skills action plan was due for publication at the time of the cabinet secretary’s response, and the fourth land use strategy should be published by the end of March.

The written response also explains that the UK nations jointly commissioned the National Energy System Operator to produce a strategic spatial energy plan, or SSEP, for Great Britain. The plan aims to provide greater clarity on the shape of Britain’s future energy system. It is envisioned that it will be published in autumn 2027.

During the subsequent evidence session, we asked the cabinet secretary for clarity on when the energy strategy will be published. She was not able to give a clear answer, on account of, she said,

“a number of things that we need to bottom out as a result of Supreme Court judgments, particularly those relating to oil and gas licensing.”—[Official Report, Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee, 14 January 2026; c 31.]

She was hopeful, however, that the final energy strategy would be published by the time that the SSEP is published, which is autumn next year, as Fergus Ewing identified a moment ago.

The petitioner has sent a few written submissions, highlighting on-going concerns across several energy policy areas.

I wonder whether Mr Ewing has any suggestion as to how we might proceed.

Yes—it would not take much slippage on the current forecast date for us to be halfway through the next session of Parliament before we have an energy strategy. Given that we have been looking for one for all of this session, that seems really to be a nonsense. We are at the end of the petitions that arose from the thematic session on energy. However, as Fergus Ewing has said, many of those fall right back to the absence of a strategy and the guidelines that might have followed from it.

Are there any other comments?

The issues have been properly explored during this parliamentary session, but they have not necessarily been resolved. The petition has probably taken them as far as it can, but I am sure that a fresh petition in the next parliamentary session will seek to address the position and it will relate more directly to the issues at hand as the session unfolds. Are we therefore content to support Mr Torrance’s proposal?

Members indicated agreement.

Colleagues, are we content so to do?

Members indicated agreement.

This is another issue that I suspect that the Parliament will discuss again.

Well, that strikes me as a fog of obfuscation, simply to avoid having to deal with the issue. Nonetheless, that is the position that has been identified to us, and I doubt that there is anything more that we can do in this session. Paul Sweeney has shone a light on a lot of inappropriate demolitions that are taking place. I hope that there will be a more robust opportunity to address the preservation of buildings in the next session.

Are colleagues content to support the recommendation made by Mr Torrance in the meantime?

Members indicated agreement.

PE2112, which was lodged by Carole Erskine on behalf of Pregnant Then Screwed, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to commission an independent review of publicly funded early learning and childcare in Scotland in order to better understand and address the challenges that families face when trying to secure and afford childcare.

We previously considered the petition on 10 September 2025, when we agreed to write to the Minister for Children, Young People and The Promise. The Scottish Government previously stated that it was not planning to commission an external review and that ministers were using a number of sources of information regarding childcare costs for families, such as the Scottish household survey, as well as other independent reports on the availability and affordability of childcare, such as the Coram childcare survey.

The Government noted that it would also be informed by the evaluation report of its 1,140 hours of early learning and childcare offer. In response to our question about when that report will be published, the minister indicates that the expectation is for early 2026. The minister suggests that the Government will draw conclusions about the impact of ELC expansion only once the full report has been published.

We asked what preliminary conclusions the Scottish Government has drawn from the early adopter communities work and what actions it will take based on that. The minister explains that the initial evaluation, which was published in October 2024, found that, overall, families were positive about their experience.

There was evidence that activities met children’s needs and that provision was appropriate to the needs of parents and carers, including in terms of covering working hours. The minister states that a second phase of evaluation, covering spring 2025 to summer 2026, is planned for publication in the second half of this year.

I gather that Meghan Gallacher is here to observe the discussion on the petition. We have a little time in hand, if she wants to step forward and say anything to the committee.

PE2149, which was lodged by Andreas Heinzl, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to legally require speed cameras in front of all schools next to major roads. We previously considered the petition on 4 June 2025, when we agreed to write to the Scottish Government.

Transport Scotland’s response to the committee provides the annual grant funding figures for the Scottish safety camera programme since 2021. The response sets out that the Scottish safety camera programme prioritises locations with the most significant casualty and collision reduction potential, and the use of collision and casualty evidence allows Transport Scotland to prioritise public investment and target it at areas of greatest need. The submission states that enforcement is not possible at every location and on every road, so the use of evidence is currently the most reliable way of identifying where it would have the most positive impact.

Transport Scotland notes that local communities and other stakeholders can request a flexible or short-term deployment of a safety camera at areas of road safety concern. The relevant safety camera unit will then consider whether an additional speed survey is required in order to determine whether speed compliance is a problem at that location.

The petitioner has provided a written statement that recognises that Police Scotland does not have the resources to enforce the speed limit in all 20mph zones, which is why he feels that it is important to have speed cameras. He conducted his own survey by taking readings from a radar-activated sign that showed the speed of vehicles as they passed; the sign was located outside a school, and the petitioner found that two thirds of cars were travelling at over the 20mph speed limit and that around half of the cars were driving at over 30mph.

There we are. Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?